Search results

The purpose of this paper is to use the example of public housing renewal public‐private partnerships (PPPs) to build knowledge on whether social infrastructure PPPs may appeal to the private sector as a less risky investment in a time of global financial uncertainty.

The research is based on an international literature review and a limited number of semi‐structured interviews with social housing PPP participants in England, the USA and Australia. These interviews were conducted by Dr Gilmour as part of his doctoral research in 2008.

The familiar distinction between social and other forms of infrastructure PPPs has been found to be unhelpful in the case of public housing renewal. This type of PPPs, through their cross‐subsidisation model, face relatively high revenue risk during a recession. However, the commitment of the public sector to the social goals of such projects suggests contract negotiation rather than default is likely if problems occur. PPP risks need to be understood by studying their detailed contract terms, rather than by broad categorisations.

This paper provides a grounded discussion rather than detailed research findings. Only a small number of projects are included and they are not necessarily representative. Cross‐national comparison is challenging because of different housing policies and economic conditions.

This paper fills a gap in the literature by both contrasting approaches to a particular type of social infrastructure PPP in different countries, and by making an early assessment of the likely impact of recent turbulence in financial and property markets.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) offer governments an opportunity to access private capital and skills to build or upgrade, operate and manage public water infrastructure services hitherto provided and run by the public sector. Access to private finance speeds up the provision of public water services in developing countries, where many governments face budgetary constraints. However, the water sector attracts the least investment flows in developing countries, well below other infrastructure sectors. This paper aims to present the results of an investigation of critical success factors (CSFs) required for attracting the private sector in water supply projects.

A structured questionnaire survey of international PPP expert opinions was conducted.

Analysis results show that the CSFs for attracting the private sector to water PPPs include political commitment from elected leaders toward PPPs for water supply; existence of a dedicated PPP unit; strong and competent public water authority; adequate fiscal capacity of a national/subnational authority; public acceptance and support of involvement of the private sector in water services; a well-designed PPP contract; existence of enabling policy and legal frameworks to support water PPPs; and profitability of water supply project(s) to attract investors and lenders. Agreement analysis also indicates a strong to very strong agreement on the significance and rankings of the CSFs.

The research findings provide an insight into a number of important issues to enable greater private participation in water supply projects, most of which aim at reminding governments of some key areas that need reform and enabling greater commitment among them to undertake such reforms. Given the limited empirical research on CSFs for attracting private participation, this research makes a contribution to the body of knowledge about private involvement in the water sector of developing countries.

Although public‐private partnerships (PPPs) have been used internationally, the New Zealand Government has only recently started to consider using PPPs to deliver public assets and services. However, there is uncertainty about whether the New Zealand Government should actively enter into PPP arrangements. The government lacks a robust decision‐making tool for assisting with choosing alternative procurement methods. PPPs are seen as risky, but innovative procurement options, with obstacles to overcome before they use can become common place. Nervousness about the use of PPPs requires the New Zealand Government to have a thorough understanding of the drivers and obstacles, and also to understand the applicability of international PPP experience to New Zealand. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the drivers and obstacles for adopting PPPs in New Zealand and provide details on how these obstacles might be overcome by using innovative country‐specific solutions.

Semi‐structured interviews with senior industry players and round table discussions are the research methods used.

The research found that the drivers for PPP adoption include acceleration of infrastructure provision, better risk allocation, whole of life cost savings, improved quality of services, access additional revenue sources, benefits for local economic and social development, and improved project scrutiny. The results show that the drivers appear to be more than securing private financing for public infrastructure. Greater efficiency in the use of resources has been emphasised by New Zealand practitioners. With regard to the apparent obstacles, research showed these to be: political, social and legal risks, unfavourable economic and commercial conditions, high transaction costs and lengthy lead time, problems related to the public sector and problems with the private sector. Possible solutions to these obstacles are derived from national and international research and assessed for their applicability to New Zealand.

The paper presents discussion on the concerns expressed by the New Zealand industry about PPPs at strategic, institutional, and industry level. The identified obstacles and suggested solutions provide some initial guidance on how to proceed with PPP implementation in New Zealand. More research needs to be done to understand the various key facets identified here (e.g. tendering process, contractual arrangement, and risk allocation) and their wider effects. The research is based on interviews with a limited number of senior industry respondents, along with the general results of three industry round table discussions. Therefore, follow‐on interviews need to be conducted with private sector partners, sponsors and funding bodies, in order to gain a wider view of the issues under investigation.

The findings of the research are of assistance to decision makers in both the public and private sectors in New Zealand. By understanding the drivers and obstacles for PPP adoption, and posing solutions to these obstacles, the New Zealand construction industry might be in a better position to adopt PPP schemes.

Public private partnerships (PPPs) centralize decision making into a hybrid type of firm, consisting of a government entity with a private firm, that is either a profit‐seeking or non‐profit entity, that initiates, constructs, maintains, or provides a service. The PPP model recognizes that both the public and the private sectors have certain comparative advantages in the performance of specific tasks. PPPs, grounded in cost/benefit analysis, have been used in Australia for decades and are presently being introduced in the USA as a form of innovate contracting. This paper aims to evaluate PPPs as a potentially transferable model for the delivery of public services. PPP firms are evaluated in terms of capital asset management, productive and allocative efficiency, transfer of risk between the public and private sectors, rights to the residual, and the public interest. A case study comparison of Fremantle Ports (Australia) and the Indiana Toll Road (USA) is employed to demonstrate PPP design and function.

A description and evaluation of public private partnerships (PPP) is presented and two original and primary case studies are reviewed.

A PPP functioning as a monopoly provider of a common pool public asset approximates economic efficiency when user fees cover virtually full cost. Identifying optimal output and quality assessment is more challenging in the case of social goods in which the public goal is subsidy minimization and clients cannot assess quality. Best practices are helpful; they guarantee the PPP process, but not the outcome. All PPPs, in whatever country or industry, are vulnerable to bureaucratic expansion whenever they are given access to subsidized loans underwritten by taxpayers.

The two case studies in this paper are 100 percent original; they were examined in person by the authors, and the managers of the two entities were interviewed in Indiana (USA) and Fremantle, Western Australia.

The purpose of this paper is to critically assess some of the micro- and macro-economic reasons for using public finance initiative types of public–private partnerships (PPPs) and how a lack of transparency may result in an “illusion” of making optimal, rational decisions related to them. A series of balances that decision makers need to make in order to choose whether or not to use PPPs are set out, as well as 15 potential “illusions” may affect such decisions.

This paper synthesizes published evidence and develops a framework for analyzing PPPs.

A wide range of factors influence the choice of PPPs, including: budget enlargement; efficiency and value for money; certainty of expenditure and delivery; flexibility; financing costs; risk sharing; procurement process and transaction costs; legacy and public assets; and the wider impacts on the local economy. However, reasons why PPPs can provide improved infrastructure and services may not be realised due to in-built incentives, behavioural biases and implementation shortcomings. Necessary support for PPPs includes strong, robust and transparent regulatory and governance systems, the dissemination of good practice to all partners, consideration of alternative funding models and high-quality advice and training.

The paper sets out a number of reasons for using PPPs, and also assesses potential drawbacks and identifies areas where greater research is required. A number of potential “illusions” are identified, whereby decisions may be affected by factors not explicitly or transparently considered, hence giving the decision an “illusion” being rational.

PPPs are significantly influenced by the socio-economic, legal, legislative and financial system they are embedded in. A clear process for approving projects and recognising all the costs and benefits of PPPs is needed, including developing criteria and instruments to measure each phase of a PPP and its overall value added to the economy and society over its lifetime. Full transparency, having suitable support and explicitly taking account of potential “illusions” affecting decisions, could lead to different decisions, including the decision not to progress the project or to use alternative funding and development methods.

Decisions on PPPs should be based on a clear and transparent long-term basis which includes the perspectives of the full range of stakeholders to help improve the appropriate operation and social sustainability of a PPP.

The paper sets out some key arguments for and against the use of PPPs in different circumstances, including why non-optimal decisions may be made.

Cities are facing challenges with their smart city agenda due to tighter budget constraints, varied interests of different stakeholders and increasing needs of technological innovation. Therefore, cities are partnering with private organisations to advance smart city projects. This research critically analyses the existing research published on public-private partnerships (PPPs) for the development of smart city projects and aims to identify the emerging themes and recommend mechanisms and strategies for improved use of smart city PPPs.

The content/textual analysis was conducted on 52 research publications relating to PPP and smart city from 2001 to 2020. With the assistance of the Leximancer software, the related literature was systematically analysed and synthesised to present the emerging themes of PPP application within the smart city context.

The analyses reveal that smart city PPPs mainly concentrated on building new or improving existing infrastructure. The research identifies five themes on PPP application for smart city development: (1) Technological innovation integration and increased risk profile, (2) Smart citizen engagement and participatory governance, (3) Data sharing and information security, (4) Transformation of PPP process and approach and (5) PPPs for urban sustainability. This research consolidates these five themes in a proposed sustainable public-private-people partnership (PPPP) framework.

This research provides a new perspective on rethinking the extant PPP models by highlighting the emerging themes in the PPP application for smart city development. This study provides useful recommendations for smart city infrastructure project partnership and engagement among the public and private sectors, and the city residents.

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.

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.

Owing to increasing demands for new infrastructure and a reduction in public sector investment, Australian governments are increasingly turning to the private sector to form partnerships in the design, construction, ownership and operation of public sector projects. This paper aims to focus on the use of public‐private partnerships (PPPs) to procure “social infrastructure projects”, such as schools, hospitals and prisons. The research seeks to map the current extent of PPPs and to present some preliminary findings on the cost of bidding.

The research traces the origins of social infrastructure PPPs in Australia and gives an up‐to‐date account by mapping projects that are either completed to date or in the pipeline. The research also describes preliminary findings on additional costs likely to be incurred in bidding for social infrastructure PPPs. A semi‐structured interview process involving senior managers from private sector PPP stakeholders was used in conjunction with a review of project documentation.

Social infrastructure projects are characterised as generally being smaller in scale than economic infrastructure projects (motorways, bridges, tunnels, etc.) and, by their very nature, also tend to be complex, particularly in terms of ongoing involvement with the community. Thus, private‐sector bidders for social infrastructure PPP projects are often presented with a situation where the financial rewards are less and the operational demands are more complex than for hard economic PPP projects. The private sector would welcome increased risk transfer from the public sector and subsequently greater involvement in the operational stages of social infrastructure PPPs.

The outcome of the research project is of assistance to decision takers in both the public and private sectors by making explicit factors which are currently accepted as being implicit in PPP bidding and project evaluation. Ongoing research into PPPs is vital to ensure the development of sustainable procurements methods, the continued funding of a nation's infrastructure, successful operational viability, fair risk distribution and subsequent financial success and that greater rewards are provided for all stakeholders, particularly the community at large.

The provision of school assets and associated services is essential for achieving a country's educational outcomes. Building and managing schools usually features large component of operation, multiple groups of stakeholders, relatively simple design and technical requirements and tight timeframes to be completed to meet the open date. Internationally, public-private partnerships (PPPs) were introduced as innovative delivery models to bring forward school projects. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the PPP experiences in the school sector focusing on the critical dimensions impacting on the viability of using PPPs for school development.

Comparative case studies of two school PPP projects based in Australia and New Zealand were adopted as the main research method. Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were used as primary data collection method.

By examining the procedural and organisational arrangements from a comparative perspective, the research finds that, for a successful school PPP, the followings are critical: sound business case development; size-adjusted and streamlined tendering process; localised private sector partner and streamlined finance; extensive stakeholder engagement; and effective governance and organisational structure and enhanced partnership.

The findings provide practical implications for policy makers and public procuring authorities initiating school projects and private entities seeking investment opportunities. By implementing the strategies derived from this research and adjusting to their own social and economic environment, governments and industry would be at a better position to develop and manage schools using PPPs.