Search results

A public‐private partnership can be seen as an appropriate institutional means of dealing with particular sources of market failure by creating a perception of equity and mutual accountability in transactions between public and private organisations through co‐operative behaviour. The relative merit of the idea of public‐private partnership is oriented mainly around a mutual benefit. As the roles of government in public‐private partnerships are not only to provide services, but also to monitor the marketplace, a well‐defined regulation framework is essential. A sound regulatory framework will increase benefits to the government by ensuring that essential partnerships operate efficiently and optimise the resources available to them in line with broader policy objectives, ranging from social policy to environmental protection. In turn, it provides assurance to the private sector that the regulatory system includes protection from expropriation, arbitration of commercial disputes, respect for contract agreements, and legitimate recovery of costs and profit proportional to the risks undertaken.

The purpose of this paper is to examine public‐private partnerships with a particular focus on the impact that such partnerships have on territorial governance. These organizations are spread all over the world with the goal of promoting community participation and sustainable development, and engaging citizens and organizations in the decision making of local governance. This situation underlines important changes in governance and territorial governance models.

A mix of qualitative and quantitative approaches are used. Analysing the existing literature, the paper focuses on specific type of public‐private partnership: the Local Action Group (LAG). Specifically, this study focuses on 63 Italian LAGs, in order to highlight their role in the challenges that local governance has to face.

Findings suggest that public‐private partnerships can represent a new model of governance – the Partnership Governance – with features that differentiate this form from other models.

Through a relatively novel statistical technique, combined with interviews, document analysis and direct observations, on the one hand the public‐private partnership phenomenon is observed, and on the other hand, a new mode of governance that is affecting the worldwide scenario in a current era and that is introducing ethical principles in governance systems is conceived.

This article argues that confusion exists as to exactly what constitutes a public-private partnership (P3). This confusion, it is maintained, creates problems for public procurement professionals when advising elected officials and government administrators on the appropriate uses of P3s. The article looks first at the imprecise language used by organizations (governments and others) to define, describe and discuss P3s. A proposed consensus definition of P3s is then introduced together with an accompanying proposed taxonomy of P3 types. The article then demonstrates how the proposed consensus definition and taxonomy can bring more clarity to discussions about P3s and their uses. The article concludes by suggesting that some public procurement standard setting organization should undertake the task of developing and promulgating more prescriptive guidance on P3s.

Why do some countries (often developing and emerging economies) adopt special laws on PPP, whilst in others PPPs are governed by the legislation on public procurement and related bylaws? This paper explains the above global discrepancies from an institutional perspective. In a contract-theoretical framework we demonstrate how PPPs can enable projects that are not feasible through standard public procurement arrangements. Incentives for private partners are created through extra benefits (often non-contractible) from their collaboration with the government (e.g. risk reduction, reputational gains, access to additional resources, lower bureaucratic burden, etc.). In a well-developed institutional environment these benefits are implicitly guaranteed, suggesting no need in a specialized PPP-enabling legislation. Otherwise, a PPP law should establish an institutional architecture to provide the above benefits.

According to the growing role of stakeholders in the implementation of public-private partnership (PPP) initiatives, the purpose of this study is to diagnose the maturity of PPPs in Poland, taking into account the range of stakeholders’ participation in public-private initiatives.

The introductory study on the stakeholders of PPPs has been based on the report analysis of Polish initiatives and the case studies’ comparative analysis. The cases represent touristic projects realized within PPPs.

The results of the study indicate that the PPPs’ personal context, though recognized internationally, is to a very low extent present in the Polish case. As the PPP market is still in the process of development, the stakeholders’ issue should be taken into consideration in the processes of the PPP development in Poland.

As regional development is continuously a key issue, especially in rural areas context, the PPP initiatives are of great importance, and therefore the discussion of pros and cons in this context may contribute to the legislation at the regional level.

The study sheds some light and gives some interesting perspectives on the issue of the personal context of PPPs and social capital. Also, the text describes the path of developing PPPs in Poland and especially the touristic projects. The research part presents the original case study comparative analysis based on table-oriented form and as such enables the new way of contextual analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how, as a multiple‐stakeholder partnership, public‐private community partnerships emerge as a holistic solution to address issues of water management.

A pilot study was conducted to gain insight into the dimensions pertinent to implementing a public‐private community partnership water project in Rajasthan, India.

Public‐private community partnerships are effective in ensuring the availability and management of water at the grassroots level. The approach introduces isodynamics, incorporating sustainability, technology, innovation and accountability.

Limited literature is available concerning water resource management incorporating a public‐private community partnership, making future research a must for further insights into this method of solving water issues.

The model proposed provides a framework that takes a broad view of public‐private community partnerships for wider replication in accord with local conditions to ensure water security for various stakeholders.

The model proposed is based on research that should be explored further to address the issue of water management holistically.

The bankruptcy of Enron Corp. has evolved into a scandal of enormous proportions involving allegations of fraud, corruption and unethical practices on the part of Enron’s corporate executives, members of its board of directors, external auditors, and high government officials in the USA. No doubt there will be many articles written about various aspects of the Enron scandal. The focus of this paper is on the relationships between Enron’s business model and the deregulatory phase of the American economy during the 1980s and 1990s. It is the argument of this paper that deregulation in the US electricity and natural gas industries fostered the creation of the Enron business model, and that this model was unsustainable, resulting in the demise of Enron Corp. Furthermore, while Enron can be viewed as an example of capitalistic excess, the paper reveals how the Enron business model developed as an American form of a public private partnership, similar to the types of public private partnerships that have been created in recent years in the UK. Investigating Enron as a public private partnership may help us to better understand the role of public private partnerships in contemporary capitalism and shed some light on the advisability of deregulatory schemes and the unintended consequences that can result from such schemes.

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.

Traditional models of full and open competition are generally applied for ordinary public procurement contracts, whereas special competitive procedures (such as unsolicited proposals) are permissible under various international and domestic frameworks for “Public-Private Partnership” (PPP) contracts. In case of the latter category of contracts, some concerns about relative lack of transparency and competition in the award process have begun to surface, while they are being increasingly relied upon for development of public infrastructure and services. This paper focuses on certain aspects of competition and transparency in the award of PPP contracts, vis-à-vis normal public procurement contracts. To facilitate a sharper identification of legal issues, it compares the relevant regulations and case law in India applicable to unsolicited proposals (UNPs) with that in the United States and those under available international frameworks. It concludes with recommendations on identified legal dimensions of UNPs with reference to government obligations on transparency and competition, so as to adequately preserve these elements in procurement of PPP infrastructure projects.

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.