Search results

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.

This chapter compares the literature on public and private sector collaboration and considers the implications for success in collaborative relationships between the sectors. It highlights key comparative drivers of intent for both types of organization, explores the relationship between them, and proposes a framework for primary investigation based on the relationship between the key areas of competitive positioning and level of risk. A case study analysis of two complex strategic partnership initiatives in Wales,¹ both involving collaboration between local health boards, local authorities, health trusts and other statutory, voluntary and private sector stakeholders is then used to illustrate the complexity of successfully managing relationships in this context.

This chapter seeks to examine the legal development of Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Kosovo and to assess their role in economic development in Kosovo, as well as PPPs’ function to Kosovo in achieve the Copenhagen criteria to access the European Union (EU). This chapter analyses the theoretical arguments behind PPPs as a mean of narrowing the infrastructure-financing gap and assess the evolution of PPPs’ jurisdiction on Kosovo and EU’s position on PPPs. This chapter includes a detailed critical analysis of the present legal framework on PPPs in Kosovo and a case study of Pristina International Airport. This chapter concludes that PPPs could be the only alternative that Kosovo has, till date, to achieve economic growth. Indeed, it can help the country to be closer to European standards, when it cuts out corruption from these partnerships. This chapter contributes to the debate on the use of PPPs in Kosovo for the construction of major infrastructures, although they are still in a very embryonic process. This chapter presents a comprehensive analysis of the benefits and risks that PPPs could offer to Kosovo as a newly formed state, contributing to the academic debate on PPPs in Balkan countries and providing useful tools for policy-makers in the decision-making process, providing a clear description of new PPPs legislation in Kosovo.

Partnerships with business involvement became a key trend in development cooperation since the late 1980s. Partnerships emerged as promising governance mechanism; however, governing partnerships in practice remained challenging – promise and reality seem to diverge. This chapter scrutinizes the tension between the promises of partnerships as governance arrangements and their actual governance challenges. It disentangles the complexity of governing partnerships by developing a framework based on a continuum between efficiency- and participation-orientation. This chapter identifies partnering approaches and their governance orientations based on an extensive review of literature in diverse academic fields and grey literature on the emergence and evolution of partnerships in development cooperation since the 1980s. Examples from the Dutch development cooperation provide illustrations for each partnership approach. Efficiency- and participation-orientation highlight competing governance rationales, logics and partnership characteristics. Partnership approaches that aim to embrace both perspectives have to deal with the inherent governance paradox between control and collaboration. This chapter identifies three key implications for research and practice: exploring new governance approaches and practices, adapting development agencies towards partnering and coordinating partnership approaches at international level. Understanding the tension between the promises of partnerships as governance arrangements and their actual governance challenges does not only contribute to more nuanced conceptualizations of partnering approaches for development but has also implications on how to govern partnerships for development in practice.

The National Health Service (NHS) Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) programme was launched in 2001 as an innovative public‐private partnership to address the historical under‐investment in local primary care facilities in England. The organisations from the public and private sector that comprise a local LIFT partnership each have their own distinctive norms of behaviour and acceptable working practices – ultimately different organisational cultures. The purpose of this article is to assess the role of organisational culture in facilitating (or impeding) LIFT partnerships and to contribute to an understanding of how cultural diversity in public‐private partnerships is managed at the local level.

The approach taken was qualitative case studies, with data gathering comprising interviews and a review of background documentation in three LIFT companies purposefully sampled to represent a range of background factors. Elite interviews were also conducted with senior policy makers responsible for implementing LIFT policy at the national level.

Interpreting the data against a conceptual framework designed to assess approaches to managing strategic alliances, the authors identified a number of key differences in the values, working practices and cultures in public and private organisations that influenced the quality of joint working. On the whole, however, partners in the three LIFT companies appeared to be working well together, with neither side dominating the development of strategy. Differences in culture were being managed and accommodated as partnerships matured.

As LIFT develops and becomes the primary source of investment for managing, developing and channelling funding into regenerating the primary care infrastructure, further longitudinal work might examine how ongoing partnerships are working, and how changes in the cultures of public and private partners impact upon wider relationships within local health economies and shape the delivery of patient care.

To the authors’ knowledge this is the first study of the role of culture in mediating LIFT partnerships and the findings add to the evidence on public‐private partnerships in the NHS.

The goal of this chapter is to respond to the theoretical inquiries by scholars who are interested in how the public–private partnership (PPP) models adapt to China’s context where political power dictates economic strategies. We also want to provide suggestions to policy designers who aim to promote a sustainable investment environment for domestic and international investors. We review the literature that explains the upside and downside of PPP projects in contemporary China. (1) We classify the trajectory of PPP evolution into four phases, i.e., emergence, growth, recession and revival. (2) We note that private companies take a disadvantageous position in the partnership compared with governments and state-owned enterprises because of a lack of specialized legislation, unequal competition between private companies and state-owned enterprises and the opposition from the civic society. (3) We identify political risks as the most influential risks. Political risks also lead to the misallocation of other risks between public and private parties that contributes to the high failure rate of China’s PPP projects. Based on these findings, we recommend governments to draft specialized legislation, stabilize the political environment and provide favourable subsidies to local governments to limit the risks involved in PPP projects. We also advise private enterprises and state-owned enterprises to focus on negotiating over task and risk division with governments when they make decisions to participate in PPP projects. This full review of studies on PPP development in China provides reliable recommendations to scholars, governments and enterprises.

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.

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.

Public–private joint ventures (PPJVs) have a stronger partnership element than standard public–private partnerships (PPPs) but PPJVs are under-researched despite this important partnership element. This article derives knowledge of incentives and barriers to goal alignment in healthcare PPJVs.

An in-depth case study of the UK’s Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) model including three PPJVs and 34 individual projects was conducted.

The main economic incentives are future opportunities creating a strong shadow of the future. This is supplemented by social incentives such as the ability to have a social impact. Enlarging the shadow of the future can encourage both parties to think long-term, avoiding short-term opportunism.

PPJV is a promising model for partnership. However, complexity through fragmented public sector partners and the financial structure can create barriers for goal alignment.

This study challenges earlier research studies based on PPJV by providing evidence that the long-term nature of PPJV, especially the potential of new projects, enables the public sector to get more engagement from the private sector.