The effect of institutional factors on public–private partnership success in ports

Examining the Interrelationship among Critical Success Factors of Public Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects

“…Pri-Ch has a direct and positive influence on Proc-Ch (the path coefficient is 0.53). This confirms Panayides et al's findings that the degree of private commitment, firm experience and leading private investors have a positive impact on PPP success [55], and the results of Zhao et al and Jamali also provided some similar evidence for the significance of the expected profitability of the project and finance capacity of the contractor in the sustainability and success of a PPP project [29,44]. Furthermore, according to Meng et al, Levinthal and March, as well as Iossa and Martimort [47,65,66], sufficient project experience will contribute to the partners to predict or assess risks by decreasing the complexity and simplifying the PPP process in the current setting, so as to reduce the total cost and improve the financial or performance sustainability of a PPP project.…”

“…This model confirms these findings, indicating that a cooperative environment (Coop-En) can influence the process of public service provisions (Proc-Ch) (−0.21 and 0.41) by the mediation effects of Pub-Ch and Pri-Ch. In addition, Coop-En has a positive correlation with Gov-Ch (0.75); this supports the importance of laws, regulations, PPP guidance and policy in PPP implementation [17,18,25,55]; and Chen and Hubbard suggested that the institutional environment determines power relations between government, private investors and citizens in public private partnerships in China [74]. Furthermore, the government may express its opinion on the guidance or policy in a formal way to create a fair cooperative environment and improve financial transparency, while the cooperative environment also shapes and guides the behaviours of the government, the private sector and the public to reduce the probability of misguided government intervention, simplify the complexity of the approval systems and limit the opportunistic behaviour of the private sector; in that case, the social or partnership sustainability of a PPP will be improved successfully.…”

Estimating economic losses of industry clusters due to port disruptions

“…C_delay,export C_direct,export C_delay,import C_direct,import national economic point of view, port risk mitigation strategies would also mean the enhancement of logistic abilities of the nation, which is seen as a key determinant for attracting foreign direct investment (Panayides et al, 2015). The developed framework in our paper is clearly in line with the growing literature that has stressed the importance of port risk considerations for the supply chain system and regional economy.…”

Governing public–private partnerships: A systematic review of case study literature

“…In general, this literature rests on either questionnaire surveys (Yang et al, 2013;Zhang, 2005a;Zhang & Ali Soomro, 2015) or case studies (Bloomfield, 2006;Hayllar, 2010;Klijn & Teisman, 2003;Silvestre & De Araujo, 2012). Moreover, studies usually have a specific perspective that typically falls into institutional (Beisheim & Campe, 2012;Cappellaro & Longo, 2011;Chou, Tserng, Lin, & Huang, 2015;Klijn & Teisman, 2003;Nijkamp, Van Der Burch, & Vindigni, 2002;Panayides, Parola, & Lam, 2015b;Tserng, Russell, Hsu, & Lin, 2012), organizational (Ahmadjian & Collura, 2012;Hayllar, 2010;Kort, Verweij, & Klijn, 2016;Marschollek & Beck, 2012), contractual (Albalate, Bel, & Geddes, 2015;Hodge & Greve, 2005;Reeves, 2008), and managerial issues (Forrer, Kee, Newcomer, & Boyer, 2010;Jefferies et al, 2002;Reeves, 2011;Vecchi & Hellowell, 2013).…”