Stakeholders’ Perspectives on the Success Criteria for Public-Private Partnership Projects

Abstract

Abstract. Given the complexity and wide stakeholder interests in public-private partnership (PPP) projects, different parties have different expectations and definitions of PPP project success. This paper explores the perceptual differences on the success criteria for PPP projects among PPP stakeholders. A questionnaire survey was conducted with targeted international PPP experts from the academic, public and private sectors. The research findings show that each stakeholder group considers effective risk management as the most critical success criterion. Moreover, the public and private sectors consider meeting output specifications as the second most critical criteria, whereas the academic sector considers satisfying the need for public facility/service. Further analysis using non parametric tests shows significant differences on the ranking of the criterion, "satisfying the need for public facility/service" between the public and private sectors and between academic and private sectors. These research outputs provide significant insights into how PPP projects' success is evaluated by various PPP stakeholders.

Determination of the Critical Success Criteria for Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Projects in Turkey

“…On the other hand, the private sector will operate the project throughout the concession period which will start immediately after the completion of the project, therefore relatively less quality which can reduce the operation and maintenance costs in the short-term would be sufficient for the private sector. Although significant differences are observed between public and private sectors on this success criterion in this study, the other studies, such as Yuan et al [16] and, Osei-Kyei and Chan [62] do not observe any significant differences between the stakeholders.…”

“…Similarly, Yuan et al [16] determined the top five objectives of four stakeholder groups, namely academia, private sector, public sector, and the general public, and they concluded that each group has different objectives to participate in PPP projects. Osei-Kyei and Chan [40] investigated perspectives of three different stakeholders, namely public, private, and academic toward the success criteria of PPP projects. Their results indicate that there are significant differences between the perspectives of the stakeholders.…”

“…Yuan et al [16] also identified the acceptable quality of the project as the most important criterion. Similarly, in the study of Osei-Kyei and Chan [62], this success criterion is determined as the most important success criterion. Reliable and quality public service obtained the secondhighest factor loading (0.848).…”

Formation of the Mechanism of Public-Private Partnership as a Factor of Innovative Development of the Regional Economy

“…The World Bank proposes to consider public-private partnership as a medium-or long-term interaction between the two parties, in which certain areas of responsibility are transferred from the public sector to the private party [3]. The International Monetary Fund classifies public-private partnerships as agreements on the basis of which the private party forms infrastructure facilities, as well as provides services initiated by the state [4].…”

Value of Investors’ Escalation of Commitment in PPP Projects Using Real Option Thinking

“…Public-private partnership (PPP) schemes have been widely applied worldwide in many fields, such as toll roads, water plants and energy infrastructure (e.g., Biygautane et al, 2019;Carbonara & Pellegrino, 2018Feng et al, 2015;Osei-Kyei & Chan, 2018;Song et al, 2015;Valipour et al, 2019;Villani et al, 2017). Despite the advantages of PPP arrangements, private investors are assuming great risks and uncertainties due to the large scale of investment and long payback period (Liu et al, 2014); consequently, they may often require mitigation of these risks through guarantees provided by governments to compensate for possible private losses (Carbonara & Pellegrino, 2018;Liu et al, 2019b;Pellegrino et al, 2019;Zapata Quimbayo et al, 2019).…”