Bundling and Unbundling in Public–Private Partnerships: Implications for Risk Sharing in Urban Transport Projects

Multi-Criterion Two-Sided Matching of Public–Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects: Criteria and Methods

“…Moreover, multiple match-degrees of the subjects in the government are close to the best match-degree of the subjects in the government in Case 1. That is, multiple matching schemes are comparatively better for the subjects in the government [14,41]. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) (2007) claimed that the inefficiency in governance led to the failure in the implementation of PPP in many countries.…”

“…To effectively balance the main parts of PPP infrastructure projects, researchers proposed approaches for TSM selection from economic and non-economic perspectives [5,14,22]. Considering the uncertainty within PPP infrastructure projects, Carbonara et al [5] established the statistical distributions of the random input variable and Monte Carlo simulation technique to calculate a 'win-win' solution for both project promoter and the host government in the concession phase; to allow for fair risk sharing between the two parties to satisfy both private and the government through guaranteeing minimum interests of each party; and finally, to fairly allocate risks between parties.…”

What Governance? The Role of Public and Private Stakeholders in Water Supply Management in Mediterranean Coastal Tourist Destinations: The Case of the Costa Brava

“…Aside from this, public-private partnerships are also becoming increasingly more frequent in water management [31]. Mixed public/private companies in charge of the water supply service are based on an agreement between the public entity and one or more private companies, the latter being in charge of supply in accordance with objectives agreed between the two parties [32]. This type of collaboration between the public and private sectors has been employed in many cities and urban areas, leading to multiple economic and employment-related benefits, as well as improving the efficiency and quality of the service [33].…”

Risk transfer in PPP projects: analysis of managed lanes in North Texas

“…Risk allocation is considered to be the most fundamental principle underlying the long-term infrastructure PPP model (Grimsey & Lewis, 2000;Marques & Berg, 2011). From the perspective of governments, users, and taxpayers, risk allocation is crucial because it incentivizes private partners to focus on the life cycle costs of constructing, operating, and maintaining the asset rather than the optimization of short-term profit (Grimsey & Lewis, 2000;Carpintero & Petersen, 2015). Finding the most appropriate risk allocation is therefore key to successful PPP implementation (Shen, Platten & Deng, 2006), and in the case of building and operating transportation infrastructure, the risks assume even greater importance because of the large fixed investments (Albalate, Bel & Geddes, 2013).…”

“…Some of them are directly related to the construction process, mainly cost overrun and delay in completion (also known as construction risks). Once the infrastructure has been built, two main categories of risks arise: demand risk and operation and maintenance (O&M) risks (Carpintero & Petersen, 2015). There are a number of factors that can affect the revenue of a PPP project: variation in the demand, changes in taxes or tariffs, and increases in input prices.…”