Public‐Private Partnerships: The Way They Were and What They Can Become

Abstract

Infrastructure PPPs are now main‐stream. Both partnership language and its contractual forms have evolved over the past few decades, though. Compared to early optimistic promises, we now have a more nuanced and balanced view of what PPPs are and what they can achieve. Indeed, modern PPPs are tied more to seeking economic growth and political success rather than demonstrating ‘one‐best‐way’ to deliver efficient infrastructure. This article traces where the infrastructure PPP idea has come from and what it is now becoming. It takes a global perspective and places Australian and international experience in this context, particularly through the global financial crisis. It concludes that PPP can become an integrated part of infrastructure development around the world, assuming learning occurs from past experience. It presents several lessons on deepening partnerships; on the multiplicity of the PPP ‘model’ and its ingredients; on policy learning and on governing infrastructure in the medium term. And it also concludes that not only does the PPP brand today still offer manifold possibilities, even more public policy experimentation is currently warranted.

Identification of critical success factors for public–private partnership projects

“…Through PPP model, the project operation and management will be proficient resulting into successful delivery of high‐quality infrastructure, which will generate ample of productive job opportunities in the country and hence will result in economic growth of the country (Hodge, Greve, & Boardman, ).…”

Research for impact: three keys for research implementation

“…Not all projects, however, are acceptable to Australian communities. The public-private partnerships used to deliver a considerable portion of these projects, for instance, have come under scrutiny (Hodge, Greve, and Boardman 2017), raising accountability issues (Stafford and Stapleton 2017), and spurring socio-economic critique (Zwalf, Hodge, and Alam 2017). Recent examples from around Australia show that many communities are unhappy with the way certain projects have been proposed or delivered (DE Martinis and Moyan 2017).…”

Next generation engagement: Setting a research agenda for community engagement in Australia's infrastructure sector

“…This article, therefore, also contributes to a growing body of literature on the practice, regulation, and relevance of CE to successful project planning and delivery (Cowell and Devine‐Wright, ; Innes & Booher, ). This includes emergent thinking on coproduction (Alford & Yates, ) and PPPs (El‐Gohary, Osman, & El‐Diraby, ; Hodge et al., ), as well as the professionalization of CE (Kemp & Owen, ) and growing concerns about a “social license to operate” (Bice, ). In exploring this diverse literature, the article seeks to integrate insights from different disciplinary perspectives, all of which inform CE but many of which rarely speak to one another.…”

“…Industry growth and the substantial investments that come with it, however, do not mean that all projects are acceptable to Australian communities. PPPs, for instance, have triggered a range of policy questions (Hodge, Greve, & Boardman, 2017), accountability issues (Stafford & Stapleton, 2017), and socioeconomic critique (Zwalf, Hodge, & Alam, 2017; see AJPA September 2017 Special issue on PPPs). Recent examples from around the country show that many communities are unhappy with the way certain projects have been proposed or delivered (De Martin and Moyan, 2017).…”