Search results

The chapter is devoted to the factors aimed at optimizing the partnership of public and private sectors in the sphere of public infrastructure development. In modern conditions of economic slowdown and budget consolidation in Russia, the infrastructure has become the most important driver of economic growth and public–private partnership (PPP) – the most perspective form of cooperation of public and private investors of infrastructure projects. PPP interpretation as a structural relationship of economic system allows the authors to model optimal combination of formal and informal institutions in order to stimulate long-term economic growth. It becomes promising to model replacement of budget funds by private investment to ensure positive impact on the Russian development despite the budget consolidation. It could only be achieved in the case of formal institutionalization of appropriate conditions for private investors as to low transactional costs and attractive financial parameters. There have been determined some PPP standards connected with public infrastructure projects in order to reduce capital expenditures of the budget funds and increase the inflow of private investment. The authors have managed to obtain model estimates and graphic interpretation of government expenditures’ efficiency increase that could help to structure the fiscal conditions to induce positive multiplier effect as a result of PPP forms improvement in the public infrastructure development.

The purpose of this article is to survey various meanings attached to a public‐private partnership (PPP) and related aspects in Western literature, and identify commonalities and differences between them. Additionally, the article intends to critically assess conflicting and overlapping views on contractual and institutional PPPs, their forms and models, and draw insights for transitional economies.

The article contrasts and compares views on PPP meanings, forms and models within Western PPP literature, and also draws comparisons with understanding of partnership aspects in the Russian language sources. The article examines theories underpinning PPPs, builds connections to PPP advantages and drawbacks, and provides critical assessment of net benefits that PPPs may bring along to the society.

The article concludes that future PPP research in transitional countries such as Kazakhstan and Russia, particularly in the area of organisational and power arrangements in partnerships, may delineate new concepts such as government as a guarantor of a PPP project, social significance of a PPP project, and risk management in a country's contextual environment.

In transitional countries, in which PPPs are in their infancy, clarification of theoretical positions, and identification of commonalities and differences between meanings attached to the PPP terminology may enable better decisions by researchers and practitioners in their selection and further development of partnerships and related concepts.

Research in the field of PPPs in transitional countries such as Russia and Kazakhstan is in its infancy. The paper intends to contribute to the body of knowledge about PPPs by providing detailed account and categorisation of their principal meanings, forms, models, underpinning theories, and drawing insights for future research in transitional countries.

The purpose of this paper is to survey various meanings attached to a public–private partnership (PPP) and related aspects in Western literature and to identify commonalities and differences between them. Additionally, the article intends to critically assess conflicting and overlapping views on contractual and institutional PPPs, their forms and models and to draw insights for transitional economies.

The article contrasts and compares views on PPP meanings, forms and models within Western PPP literature and also draws comparisons with understanding of partnership aspects in the Russian language sources. The paper examines theories underpinning PPPs, builds connections to PPP advantages and drawbacks and provides critical assessment of net benefits that PPPs may bring along to the society.

The article concludes that future PPP research in transitional countries such as Kazakhstan and Russia, particularly in the area of organisational and power arrangements in partnerships, may delineate new concepts such as government as a guarantor of a PPP project, social significance of a PPP project and risk management in a country’s contextual environment.

Research in the field of PPPs in transitional countries such as Russia and Kazakhstan is in its infancy. The paper intends to contribute to the body of knowledge about PPPs by providing detailed account and categorisation of their principal meanings, forms, models and underpinning theories and by drawing insights for future research in transitional countries.

This paper aims to investigate the influence of public-private partnerships (PPPs) on social and economic conditions in Kazakhstan and Russia from a public economics perspective, namely, through the lens of a market failure and PPPs’ negative externalities.

Drawing on the concept of a market failure and using the externalities perspective, the paper investigates whether partnerships are instrumental in solving market problems, which is illustrated by the evidence from ongoing PPP projects in Kazakhstan and Russia.

Results show that citizens face expansion of monopolistic trends in the service provision and decreased availability of public services. Additionally, the government support to partnerships recreates a negative externality in the form of a higher risk premium on loan interest rates that banks use to finance PPPs. The partnerships’ impact on sustainable development often appears detrimental, as they significantly intensify the struggle between sub-national governments for increased transfers from the national budget.

The government agencies must incorporate the appraisal of the PPP externalities and their effects on the society in the decision-making regarding the PPP formation.

The authors suggest that, although government is interested in PPPs’ positive externalities, in reality many negative externalities may offset the positive spillover effects. As a result, the partnerships’ contributions to economic and social sustainability remain controversial. Extending the value-for-money concept to incorporate the assessment of PPP externalities might significantly enhance the partnership conceptualisation by more comprehensive and accurate assessment of PPPs’ economic and social value.

In what seems as an infinitely ongoing debate regarding the purchasing power parity (PPP) theory, this paper seeks to question the strength of the scientific “evidence” put forward by the PPP revisionists

In this paper, the validity of the PPP revisionists' scientific evidence supporting long‐run PPP is questioned based on the replication of an influential review study that is considered by PPP revisionists to exhibit “some of the strongest evidence” in favour of the PPP theory.

By simulation experiments it is demonstrated that the traditional PPP unit root tests are non‐robust to the empirically identified (G)ARCH distortions. Due to (G)ARCH distortions, over‐rejections for the traditional unit root tests are shown to be a problem that potentially misleads researchers to believe that long‐run PPP holds under circumstances when it is in fact not valid. As a potential remedy to this problem, a new unit root test is introduced which is robust to conditional heteroscedasticity disturbances, and in contrast to traditional unit root tests, it exhibits no significant empirical support for the PPP theory.

The study illustrates that the PPP revisionists' unit root tests cannot reliably test the PPP hypothesis in the presence of (G)ARCH distortions, due to bad power and size properties. Perhaps it is time to conclude that, based on the currently existing research, it is virtually impossible to empirically come to a credible conclusion regarding whether long‐run PPP holds or not.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to identify and rank the challenges influencing the delivery of the housing public-private partnership (HPPP) in Tanzania; and second, to suggest solutions in the form of a conceptual public-private partnership (PPP) framework model that will address the identified challenges and boost the chances of success.

Using a convergent parallel (concurrent) mixed method approach, data were collected from 28 stakeholders involved with HPPP projects in Tanzania using a hand-delivered and e-mail survey and 13 semi-structured interviews with public and private sector respondents. The quantitative data included subjecting the 19 challenges as identified from the literature to parametric tests such as one-sample t-tests and descriptive statistics tests such as measures of central tendencies and frequency analysis through Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 22.0). Qualitative data employed content analysis. The research was further underpinned by a number of theoretical perspectives such as Gidden’s structuration theory, contingency theory, relational and equity theory.

The top five ranked challenges influencing the delivery of HPPP were “inadequate PPP skills and knowledge”; “poor contracting and tendering documents”; “inadequate project management”; “inadequate legal framework”; and “misinformation on financial capacity of private partners”. The least six ranked and most significant challenges based on the one-sample (single) t-tests were as follows: “Poor risk allocation”; “inexperienced private partner”; “unequal qualification and contributions of expertise”; “poor enabling environment to attract competent partners”; “inadequate mechanisms for recovery of private investors’ capital”; and “high costs in procuring PPP projects”. The qualitative study further confirmed the challenges and cited the reason for the failure of joint venture projects as the lack of motivation for undertaking similar PPP projects. Despite the increased awareness of PPP projects and associated marginal benefits, the main impediment to the uptake and delivery of PPP housing projects remained the lack of skills and expertise.

The proposed framework model is not yet tested, but since this paper is part of the ongoing research, the next stage involves the testing and validation of the model. Future studies could test the applicability of the proposed framework in other HPPP projects in Tanzania, and in other similar developing countries. Second, the validated framework can contribute towards addressing similar challenges as well as providing guidance. The proposed framework model is not yet tested, but since this paper is part of the ongoing research, the next stage involves the testing and validation of the model. Furthermore, recommendation for future research is to test the alignment of the identified challenges to the proposed remedial solutions across the five phases within the proposed PPP framework with a number of case studies.

The identified challenges were used to form the basis of the framework presented in this paper. Furthermore, these provide useful information, thus leading to increased awareness to enable successful delivery of HPPP in Tanzania. Similarly, both the government and policy makers could use the findings as the basis for re-examining the existing PPP policy and regulations, and reflecting on the existing situation with a view to improving the delivery of future HPPP projects.

The empirical study is among the first that identifies and ranks the challenges of PPP for housing projects delivery within the Tanzanian context. The identification of the challenges enabled their ranking, resulting in the mapping out of the most critical challenges. Furthermore, using the Gidden’s structuration theory, the study illustrates how institution mechanisms (structures) address these delivery challenges, thus influencing the implementation of HPPP in Tanzania, and how individual stakeholders (human agents or agency) are able to make choices (advocated solutions) in dealing with the challenges. More so, these constraints (challenges) as identified and viewed through the contingency and equity theoretical lenses form the foundation for developing the PPP conceptual framework. The proposed framework would thus serve as a mechanism for providing practical solutions as well as reducing the level of severity of the identified challenges.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are characterised by contracts which are necessarily incomplete due to the complexity of their contractual specifications for the contracted services combined with the long-term legal obligations they create. This creates high transaction costs including sharing (and so bearing) risks. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the link between risk sharing and governance, providing a new perspective for analysis with less emphasis on transaction costs and more on PPPs as strategic alliances.

Three main issues are analysed. First, the definition of PPP in terms of both the type of arrangements and the actors involved, structures varying from one country to another and between contracts. Second, the definition of strategic alliance, identifying which form(s) of PPP is a strategic partnership. Third, reconsideration of incomplete contract theory to identify the circumstances where a strategic alliance can accommodate high transaction costs.

The paper concludes that establishing PPPs as strategic alliances could rectify problems of incomplete contracts by implementing a multidimensional (rather than technocratic) approach to risk governance.

The contribution to knowledge provided by this study is rooted in the conceptualization of PPPs as strategic alliances by distinguishing the tangible characteristics of strategic alliance related to the letter of the contract from the intangible characteristics related to the spirit of the contract with the main purpose being to create both public and private value.