The governance of public–private partnerships in sports infrastructure: Interfering complexities in Belgium

Hurk, Martijn van den; Verhoest, Koen

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.05.005

Cited by 35 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently the literature on PPP governance is well developed on a macro and a meso level (Van den Hurk and Verhoest ; Hodge et al ; Wang et al ). For example, Hueskes et al () focus on governance instruments to realize sustainability considerations in PPPs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do professionals perceive the governance of public–private partnerships? Evidence from Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark

Warsen

Greve

Klijn

et al. 2019

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In public–private partnerships (PPPs), the collaboration between public and private actors can be complicated. With partners coming from different institutional backgrounds and with different interests, governing these partnerships is important to ensure the projects' progress. There is, however, little knowledge about the perceptions of professionals regarding the governance of PPPs. This study aims to exlore professionals' viewpoints about governing PPPs, and to explain potential differences using four theoretical governance paradigms. Using Q methodology, the preferences of 119 public and private professionals in Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark are explored. Results show four different viewpoints regarding the governance of PPPs. Experience, country and the public–private distinction seem to influence these viewpoints. Knowledge of these differences can inform efforts to govern PPPs and contribute to more successful partnerships.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do professionals perceive the governance of public–private partnerships? Evidence from Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark

Warsen

Greve

Klijn

et al. 2019

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Standardizing tendering procedures and contracts could reduce the complexity of PPPs (lower transaction costs), increase the confidence of the private market (more competition), and refine procedures and documents based on learning processes (Van den Hurk and Verhoest ). Whereas standardization has improved a lot in pioneering countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, this is not the case for Belgium (Van den Hurk and Verhoest ). The limited deal flow and the relatively young age of PPP in Belgium explain this.…”

Section: Societal and Spatial Benefits In Pppsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2004, the Government of Flanders (the northern region of Belgium) launched a range of PPP programs and projects in different sectors, such as education, urban development, healthcare, roads, social housing, sports, and tourism, worth 6 billion euros in total. Ten years later, PPP has become a well‐embedded procurement method for long‐term public infrastructure projects, mainly driven by the desire to keep major investments off the balance sheet of the public sector (Van den Hurk and Verhoest ; Willems and Van Dooren ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten Lessons from Ten Years PPP Experience in Belgium

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2004 Flanders, the northern region of Belgium launched a range of large public–private partnership (PPP) projects for a total value of 6 billion euros. Ten years later, PPP has become a well‐embedded procurement method for long‐term public infrastructure projects. This article makes a critical ‘round‐up’ of PPP experience in Belgium based on the perspectives of infrastructure professionals who were asked to provide their views on performance‐related issues in PPP projects. Two workshops were held to further enrich the input and ideas. Based on this empirical material this article formulates 10 lessons to improve PPP performance, which is deliberately broadly defined. It argues that the dominant ‘value for money’ evaluations, following strictly financial or commercial logics (in both the private and public sectors), need to be broadened. Given the large impact and cost of large infrastructure projects on society, broader societal and spatial contributions of PPPs are needed.

show abstract

“…operation and maintenance phase), the moment when initial contractual commitments can be contrasted to actual governing activity, collaborative patterns, and contractual changes (Verweij et al, 2017). Furthermore, there is mixed evidence of PPP performance in terms of delivering infrastructure on time and within budget (Hodge & Greve, 2007;Johnston & Gudergan, 2007;Van den Hurk & Verhoest, 2015), satisfying the needs of taxpayers and end-users (Hodge & Greve, 2010), providing flexibility along the project cycle (Blanken, 2008;Cruz & Marques, 2013), and satisfactory outcomes according to managerial perception (Verweij, 2015). PPPs are not immune to traditional conflicts due to risk misallocation (Hoezen, 2012), displaced-agency problems (Volker & Hoezen, 2017), and role ambiguity (Anastasopoulos, Haddock, & Peeta, 2014).…”

Section: The Dynamic Nature Of Public-private Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, existing literature suggests that establishing innovative contractual forms of economic exchange between the public and the private sector does not automatically lead to improved performance. There is mixed evidence of the performance of PPPs in terms of delivering infrastructure on time and budget (Hodge & Greve, 2007Van den Hurk & Verhoest, 2015), satisfying the needs of taxpayers and end-users (Hodge & Greve, 2010), providing flexibility along the project cycle (Blanken, 2008;Cruz & Marques, 2013), and providing satisfactory outcomes according to the perception of public and private managers (Verweij, 2015). PPP is not a magical contractual recipe to overcome typical governance problems of projects such as displaced agency, and their one-off, uncertain and highly asset-specific nature (Levitt, Henisz, & Settel, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing and (re)producing project governance

Avila¹,

Andres²

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2.1 INTRODUCTION 2.2 CONTRACTUAL AND RELATIONAL INTERPLAY IN PPPs 2.3 REALIST SOCIAL THEORY FOR STUDYING GOVERNING ACTIVITY 2.3.1 Governance Structures and Situational Logics 2.3.2 Governing Activity: Positioned-Practices and Reflexivity 2.3.3 Cycles of Interplay and Levels of Change 2.4 TOWARD A PROCESS FRAMEWORK OF GOVERNING ACTIVITY IN ONGOING PPPs 2.5 ILLUSTRATIVE CASE 2.5.1 Approach and Methods 2.5.2 Functional Change as a Triggering Event 2.5.3 Governing Activity 2.5.4 Complementarity/Substitution from a Dynamic Perspective 2.5.5 Cycles of Governing Activity and Underlying Managerial Struggle 2.6 DISCUSSION 2.6.1 Complexity of the Interplay Between Contractual and Relational Governance 2.6.2 Governing Activity and Governance Structure 2.6.

show abstract

The governance of public–private partnerships in sports infrastructure: Interfering complexities in Belgium

Cited by 35 publications

References 41 publications

How do professionals perceive the governance of public–private partnerships? Evidence from Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark

How do professionals perceive the governance of public–private partnerships? Evidence from Canada, the Netherlands and Denmark

Ten Lessons from Ten Years PPP Experience in Belgium

Governing and (re)producing project governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About