Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to analyse Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) in the developing and emerging economies as a multifaceted challenge from viewpoint of the 10 keys ‘for’ and ‘against’ PPPs: feasibility; planning; optimization; modernization and development; financing; project delivery; project operation; supervision; user satisfaction and accounting issues. The conceptual model and the reasons were formulated by the authors some 10 years ago, based on the literature and case-study reviews. Relevance of those reasons was verified in practice. The knowledge and critical perspective on the above-stated reasons are relevant for the implementation of PPP projects in any national economy – developed, emerging or developing, but it is quintessential for the implementation of PPPs in the economies that are at the early stage of implementation of PPPs. Although for the identification of the above-stated reasons, wide comparative literature and case-studies review was conducted, the reasons were verified in practice in Slovenia only. Slovenia is considered as one of the most advanced transition countries of Central Europe and a developed economy. This chapter can improve public policy, teaching, learning and practice of PPP implementation in developing and emerging economies. The value of this chapter is in the approach which goes beyond the usual defending or renouncing of PPPs. This chapter also clearly identifies the importance of a sincere motive for the implementation of PPPs by the government as a prerequisite for the successful implementation of PPPs.

An examination of the commonalities and differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector.

A literature review of 100 publications in international academic journals over the last 20 years.

The chapter develops a framework which links the dimensions of the public/private-distinction (ownership, funding, control and type of goals) to the design and use of performance management systems (PMS). This framework subsequently informs a literature review, which can be summarised as follows: Multi-dimensionality of the PMS is core in both public and private sector organisations, but quite many private sector papers point to a financial focus at the top of the PMS, while public sector organisations show a broad variety of performance indicators, including those on societally relevant goals. In addition, a link between the PMS and strategies can be found in the public and the private sector, but the match between different strategies and PMS design is more elaborated in the private sector. These findings are largely in accordance with our expectations. The review also finds support for the assumption that performance information in public sector organisations is primarily used for external accountability reasons, while internal managerial control is the main purpose in private firms. The use of performance information is quite intensive and mostly functional in both sectors, which does not meet our expectations. Overall, the differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector are less stringent than expected.

Due to limited evidence about the importance of performance-related pay systems and no evidence about targeting in both sectors, a more focused literature review on these issues would be desirable.

Mutual learning between both sectors, for example the public sector can learn from the private sector on how to link strategy to the PMS and the private sector can learn from the public sector about serving a multitude of stakeholders in the PMS.

A comprehensive review of performance management practices in the public and private sector.

This chapter uses data from the World Bank’s Private Participation in Infrastructure project database, and hand-collected evidence on project performance, to examine how PPPs are applied to infrastructure development in Africa, and how well they have delivered expected benefits. It has two analytical parts: an investment trend analysis and a meta-analysis of project performance and explanatory factors. The analysis shows growth both in number and volume of PPP investments that is weaker than that observed in other developing regions, and more volatile. The performance of PPP contracts appears to be improving over time with an overall cancelation rate of 7% over the assessment period. Although PPPs have contributed to increasing infrastructure stock, they have not completely met their potential, especially with respect to increasing infrastructure access rates. The main determinants of performance include accuracy of costing and allocation of risks, consistency of macro policies with the objectives and functioning of PPPs, coherence of sector policies and plans and local capacity. Contract cancellations are mainly explained by the misalignment of outcomes with government objectives, in particular, access and investment objectives. These findings suggest that PPP application should be well planned to ensure coherence of a wide range of policies, readiness of institutions and capacity of public sector actors. This chapter contributes to closing information gaps on a relatively novel policy instrument, and provides useful evidence to support prudent policy making at the time of considerable growth in PPP application.

Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) are used worldwide to reduce the infrastructure gap. Public entities encourage private sector involvement through PPPs, but the degree of such commitment is affected by several factors, related to the specific PPP project and to the institutional and economic environment in the host country. The purpose of this chapter is to perform an empirical analysis of the determinants of the degree of private sector participation in PPPs in developing and emerging countries. This chapter explores fractional response models to explain the degree of private participation in PPPs using data from 2000 to 2014, obtained from the World Bank’s PPI database. The results suggest that the type of project is a key determinant of the degree of private sector involvement. Favourable fiscal conditions and the existence of explicit support from the government (direct or indirect) increase the degree of private involvement. Multilateral support reduces private participation, emphasizing a substitution effect. In the same way, private sector involvement appears as a substitute to overcome failures in countries with poor financial systems. The results are particularly important for public authorities. This chapter identifies key factors that can foster private sector involvement in PPPs. Although the expansion of PPPs is a well-accepted reality, empirical studies that explore factors that affect the degree of private sector involvement are still lacking. This chapter particularly addresses this topic.

This chapter examines whether changes in return to education affect workers’ mobility between jobs. Employee panel data are used to study staff movement from the public sector to the private sector or vice versa from 1995 to 2005. It is found that in line with the situation in other advanced economies, the wage structure in the public sector in Israel is more compressed than that in the private sector, for employees with similar characteristics and in general, and that the difference widened during the period reviewed. Hence, the findings support the contention that the public sector compensates employees less for their skills than does the private sector. In addition, it is found that during that period the return to education increased in the private sector by about 1 percentage point more than in the public sector. In an analysis of those who switched from one sector to the other, our findings imply that if the return to education changed at the same rate in both sectors, the probability of highly educated workers moving from the public sector to the private sector would be 5 percent lower, and the probability of highly educated workers moving from the private sector to the public sector would be 2 percent higher.

This paper examines the transformation of Syrian political economy from 1970 until 2005. I argue that Syria has undergone two important phases of political and economic transformation, from building a centralized state and economy in the early 1970s to embarking on the path of market economy in the early 1990s. With the logic of competitiveness guiding the direction of economic development, the socio-economic changes of the mid-1980s and after have corresponded with an important process of class and state formation. After a brief discussion of the current transition in Syria, the following sections of the paper attempt to provide a critical study of the different strategies for economic development. Section two examines the process of state and economic centralization of the 1970s and 1980s and highlights the contradictions of this period. Section three assesses the impact of economic liberalization through a study of competitiveness in the economic policies of the 1990s and 2000. The final section examines the economic and political impasse that Syria has been faced with. In conclusion, I argue that the current path of market economy as the strategy for capital accumulation has not resolved the socio-economic problems that Syria has faced in the last two decades. This strategy will continue to face contestation by marginalized groups such as factions of the Baath Party, landless peasants, workers and small producers as Syria becomes even more integrated into the regional and global economy.

The World Bank's new Education Sector Strategy 2020 (2011) points to an important role for private actors in the development of high-quality, high-equity education systems that effectively address poverty alleviation in low and middle-income countries. This chapter asks whether this emphasis on private participation is new, focusing in particular on Bank policies, research, and operations in K-12 education. It also explores some surprising disjunctures between the World Bank Group's official policies promoting privatization and its operational practices. To do so, the chapter draws on a separate research project for which we completed a review of the Bank's current portfolio of projects in K-12 education and a series of interviews with World Bank staff. We also look at the expansion of Bank activities beyond its traditional arms – the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and International Development Association (IDA) lending facilities – by including a brief a review of the educational activities of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which directly supports the private sector in education.

Purpose: Worldwide economies have been shattered by the alarming increase in Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) in Banking Sector. In India, the rise in NPA levels gives a clear insight into the health of industry and state. This study aims to determine how NPAs in India impact the profitability of eight banks chosen from the public and private sectors; specifically: Punjab National Bank (PNB), Bank of India (BOI), UCO Bank, Punjab and Sind Bank (PSB), HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, ICICI Bank, and Yes Bank; during the period 2009/2010 to 2017/2018.

Design/methodology/approach: The study utilised IBM SPSS version 20 application to carry out our statistical analysis of measures of central location (mean and median), measures of dispersion (standard deviation), to carry out the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to check the normality of data, the Mann–Whitney U test (for two groups) for median comparison between private and public sector banks and the Kruskal–Wallis test (for more than two groups) for median comparison for more than two banks. p ≤0.01 and p ≤0.05 were the two-tailed significance level used for determining the significance of all statistical tests.

Findings: Trend analysis and statistical tests show that the trend in public sector banks to have NPAs is higher compared to private sector banks, and losses arising from NPA impact the banks’ profitability.

Practical implications: It is apparent that NPAs are a large threat to banks in India as it reflects the state of the Indian economy. The growth of the economic cycle is predominantly dependent on the smooth and profitable functioning of private and public sector banks. This current study focusses on and compares the impact of NPAs on the profitability of public and private sector banks. NPAs have grown exponentially more in the case of public sector banks than private sector banks, which has affected the former banks’ financial health and performance. Increases in the level of NPAs adversely affect the working style and long-term stability of public and private sector banks in the economy.

Social Implications: NPAs have a negative influence on the profitability of the banks as well as on the economic growth of the country too. However, it is recommended that management in the banking sector, particularly the public banks, should use various preventive and recovery strategies to reduce the risk of failure and to keep track of NPAs to stay safe.

Originality/value: This study aims to determine how NPAs in India impact the profitability of eight banks chosen from the public and private sectors; specifically: PNB, BOI, UCO Bank, PSB, HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, ICICI Bank, and Yes Bank; during the period 2009/2010 to 2017/2018.

Heritage assets (HAs) are important goods or properties that define a country’s culture, history, and identity. Public sector entities are the primary custodians of a nation’s heritage properties; however, many local museums and historic houses are managed by private not-for-profit (NFP) organisations that essentially act to conserve these heritage places.

Through a documentary analysis, this chapter aims to investigate the points of convergence and the differences between accounting policies for governmental heritage and private NFP organisations.

The study demonstrates that even private NFP entities present the same characteristics as public sector ones in the accounting of heritage goods and that there are certain accounting standards being equally applicable; therefore, the accounting policies for governmental heritage are in accordance with the accounting policies for NFP organisations such as museums, art galleries, charities, churches, for their heritage goods.