Are Public–Private Transactions the Future of Infrastructure Finance?

Brown, Kathleen Sullivan

doi:10.1177/1087724x07303680

Cited by 30 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…PPP advocates often treat the sale proceeds from concessions as a net benefit. Brown (2007: 322), for example, makes a typical claim when she says: ‘One of the key drivers of value in the Indiana Toll Road, Chicago Skyway, and Texas SH 121 leases was the ability of the concessionaire to make an upfront payment in return for the future cash flows that the project would produce.’ The same phenomenon characterizes almost all PPPs. In a new hospital or highway PPP, for example, the private sector pays the up‐front capital expenditure for design and construction and receives either a shadow toll (linked to use) or an agreed schedule of payments in the future.…”

Section: Political Economy Explanations Of the Welfare Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Political Economy of Public‐private Partnerships and Analysis of Their Social Value*

Boardman

Vining

2012

Ann Public Coop Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article applies political economy theory to public-private partnerships (PPPs). First, we propose that social welfare is the appropriate normative evaluation criterion to evaluate the social value of PPPs. Second, we specify the goals of PPP participants, including private-sector partners and governments. Third, we review the observed outcomes of PPPs and analyze them from both a political economy perspective and a social welfare perspective. Fourth, based on a comparison of the actual outcomes of PPPs to normatively desirable social welfare outcomes, we propose some 'rules for governments' concerning the design of government PPP institutions and the management of PPPs. We argue that if governments were to adopt these rules there would be fewer PPPs in total, they would be more like traditional government contracts and there would be a greater likelihood of improved social welfare. However, political economy theory also explains why implementation of any reform will be difficult. La economía política de las alianzas público-privadas. Análisis de su valor socialEste artículo aplica la teoría de la economía política a las alianzas público-privadas (PPPs). Los autores proponen, en primer lugar, el bienestar social como criterio apropiado para evaluar las PPPs. Precisan, a continuación, los objetivos de los participantes en las PPPs, tanto de los socios privados como de los gubernamentales. En tercer lugar, pasan revista a los resultados observados en las PPPs y los analizan simultáneamente desde perspectivas de economía política y de bienestar social. Porúltimo, se basan en una comparación de resultados efectivos de las PPPs con resultados normativamente deseables en términos de bienestar social, proponiendo a los gobiernos algunas "reglas" * We would like to thank Piet de Vries for helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

show abstract

Section: Political Economy Explanations Of the Welfare Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Political Economy of Public‐private Partnerships and Analysis of Their Social Value*

Boardman

Vining

2012

Ann Public Coop Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Private investments can come from direct investments in a public SPV or FDIs. Alternatively, and more commonly, investments can come in the form of public-private partnerships (PPPs), where private companies provide a combination of design, construction, operation and maintenance expertise (Brown, 2007). Lastly, the private sector can also provide direct services as subcontractors by providing in-detail services, such as single-window technology in border-crossing points and fiber-optic technology in tunnel construction.…”

Section: Modalities Of Private Sector Participation In Cross-border Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attracting private financing in cross-border infrastructure investments

Bisbey

et al. 2020

J Infrastruct Policy Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross-border infrastructure projects offer significant economic and social benefits for the Asia-Pacific region. If the required investment of $8 trillion in pan-Asian connectivity was made in the region’s infrastructure during 2010–2020, the total net income gains for developing Asia could reach about $12.98 trillion (in 2008 US dollars) during 2010–2020 and beyond, of which more than $4.43 trillion would be gained during 2010–2020 and nearly $8.55 trillion after 2020. Indeed, infrastructure connectivity helps improve regional productivity and competitiveness by facilitating the movement of goods, services and human resources, producing economies of scale, promoting trade and foreign direct investments, creating new business opportunities, stimulating inclusive industrialization and narrowing development gaps between communities, countries or sub-regions. Unfortunately, due to limited financing, progress in the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region is low.This paper examines the key challenges faced in financing cross-border projects and discusses the roles that different stakeholders—national governments, state-owned enterprises, private sector, regional entities, development financing institutions (DFIs), affected people and civil society organizations—can play in facilitating the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region. In particular, this paper highlights the major risks that deter private sector investments and FDIs and provides recommendations to address these risks.

show abstract

“…In the case of transportation, public demand for improvements to transportation infrastructure in the United States has encouraged innovative network arrangements for meeting future needs (Brown, 2007;Leavitt & Morris, 2007;Sciara & Wachs, 2007). At the federal level, Congress' passage of various transportation acts allowed for greater reliance on the private sector to finance highways and intermodal facilities (see Table 2).…”

Section: Innovations In Transportation Infrastructure Arrangementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toll Roads, Politics, and Public—Public Partnerships

Battaglio¹,

Khankarli²

2008

Public Works Management & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governments have increasingly relied on market mechanisms to improve the efficiency of public services. This is especially true when it comes to financing the nation's transportation infrastructure system, where enabling legislation at the federal and state level has gradually placed greater reliance on the private sector through collaborative endeavors such as public—private partnerships (P3s). This article examines the process and structure of such collaborative endeavors in the case of the toll road along Texas State Highway (SH) 121. Initially, the state transportation agency entered into an agreement with a private consortium but later withdrew support for the agreement in favor of a public—public partnership (PPuP) with the local toll road authority. State and local politicians withdrew support for the private consortium as public sentiment waned. The article concludes that citizen input and state and local politics have a significant impact on the process and structure used for implementing public—private partnerships.

show abstract

Are Public–Private Transactions the Future of Infrastructure Finance?

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

The Political Economy of Public‐private Partnerships and Analysis of Their Social Value*

The Political Economy of Public‐private Partnerships and Analysis of Their Social Value*

Attracting private financing in cross-border infrastructure investments

Toll Roads, Politics, and Public—Public Partnerships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About