Public Values in Public–Private Partnerships

Although public–private partnerships (PPPs) are frequently analyzed and lauded in terms of efficiency, their impact on public values is often neglected. As a result, there is little empirical evidence supporting or rejecting the claim that PPPs have a negative effect on public values. This case study provides valuable insight into the relationship between public values in PPPs and the circumstances affecting the degree to which public values are upheld. Research findings demonstrate that whether public values are at stake in PPPs cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. Rather, public values can be threatened, safeguarded, or even strengthened depending on the project phase and the specific facet of the public value under scrutiny. Insight into which circumstances influence the safeguarding of public values in DBFMO (design–build–finance–maintain–operate) projects unravels the strengths and weaknesses of PPPs in terms of public values, providing public managers with a starting point for optimization.     

Public–Private Partnerships and the Public Accountability Question

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are growing in popularity as a governing model for delivery of public goods and services. PPPs have existed since the Roman Empire, but their expansion into traditional public projects today raises serious questions about public accountability. This article examines public accountability and its application to government and private firms involved in PPPs. An analytical framework is proposed for assessing the extent to which PPPs provide (or will provide) goods and services consistent with public sector goals of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Six dimensions—risk, costs and benefits, political and social impacts, expertise, collaboration, and performance measurement—are incorporated into a model that assists public managers in improving partnerships’ public accountability.     

Transparency of Risk and Reward in U.K. Public–Private Partnerships

Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) are an increasingly common mechanism for the renewal of public sector infrastructure, although in the United Kingdom, these have been criticized as representing poor value for money. An inherent assumption of much of this criticism is that a corollary of detriment for the public sector is benefit for the private sector. This paper highlights the difficulty of objectively verifying the many criticisms and assumptions regarding risk and reward associated with PPPs. Public and private sector disclosure policies and systems are analyzed and we conclude that neither sector practices openness and transparency. This results in a democratic accountability deficit in the public sector and a lack of meaningful data being made available to stakeholders in private companies.     

A Contingent Approach to the Organization and Management of Public–Private Partnerships: An Empirical Study of English Health Care

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) have become a prominent feature of contemporary public policy. Although research shows variation in the contractual configuration of partnerships, there is little evidence of how these shape service and workforce organization. Through comparative ethnographic research on two PPP health care providers in the English National Health Service, this article develops the idea that PPPs exhibit “tight” and “loose” arrangements that relate to “downstream” service and workforce management. It induces four empirically grounded mediating factors to describe this relationship. The first relates to the “dependence” between partners in terms of financing, strategy, and resource sharing; the second to the “strategic orientation” of leaders; the third to the composition of the “professional workforce”; and the fourth to the “management approach” to service and workforce organization. The article contributes to the research literature by exploring the contingencies in how PPPs are operationalized on the ground.     

Preserving the Public Interest in Highway Public–Private Partnerships: A Case Study of the State of Texas

Faced with existing revenues sources that are insufficient to finance highway maintenance and construction needs, some state and local governments are using or considering highway public–private partnerships. These partnerships may be attractive as a way for a government to obtain upfront revenues from the long‐term lease of a road and to shift some of the construction and operations risks to a private firm. However, with these benefits, comes the need to preserve the public interest. This paper discusses issues related to preserving the public interest in highway public–private partnerships and presents a case study of the State of Texas. The case study focuses on an analysis of the strengths and limitations of Texas’ policies and procedures to protect the public interest in the use of long‐term leases for the financing, construction, and operation of new toll roads. The case study also discusses what other governments may be able to learn from Texas’ experiences.     

Public–Private Partnerships: Organisational Hybrids as Channels for Local Mobilisation and Participation?1

The article focuses on new forms of governance involving partnerships between public and private actors. As several scholars have noticed, organisational hybrids at the intersection of the public and private sectors play an important part in the implementation of collective action. Local economic development in particular has provided a fertile ground for building coalitions across traditional divisions, and encouraging partnerships. This applies to Norway as well as to other liberal Western democracies.
Obviously, the formation of partnerships reflects efforts to design more efficient and flexible instruments for founding new firms and for supporting local entrepreneurs. The article, however, raises the question of whether these arrangements may entail a far more expanded role and domain, opening up new channels for participation and mobilisation. By expanding their agenda and integrating new segments of the local community, public–private partnerships appear to be an innovation in local democracy.
Analytically, the article utilises elements of regime theory. Although the partnerships studied hardly constitute stable coalitions dominating local politics, they nevertheless illustrate how the building of coalitions including both private and public actors is crucial to coping with the problems and challenges of local restructuring and revitalisation. Case studies carried out in Norwegian municipalities provide the main empirical source. The article does, however, build on experience from other European countries.     

Analyzing Territorial and Sectorial Dimensions of Public–Private Partnerships in Science,Technology, and Innovation policies

The performance of innovation systems depends, to a great extent, on the degree of public–private collaboration they involve. Thus, innovation policies often aim to enhance this collaboration through public–private partnerships. These partnerships are a multidimensional phenomenon whose success depends on factors related to each of their dimensions. This paper proposes the use of an analytical model that reflects the multidimensional nature of public–private partnerships and analyses to what extent they are applied in a specific innovation system in order to identify the territorial and sectorial factors that act as barriers or drivers to use them. This model aims to help policy makers design appropriate public–private partnerships in each context. The case under review is the Spanish innovation system, given that this system has been suffering from a structural lack of collaboration for several decades, despite the implementation of policies aimed to foster this. Thus, if the model works, it should be able to identify key factors that influence greater or more restricted use of the different PPP formulas.     

Public–Private Partnerships: An International Performance Review

Public–private partnerships are enjoying a global resurgence in popularity, but there is still much confusion around notions of partnership, what can be learned from our history with partnerships, and what is new about the partnership forms that are in vogue today. Looking at one particular family of public–private partnerships, the long-term infrastructure contract, this article argues that evaluations thus far point to contradictory results regarding their effectiveness. Despite their continuing popularity with governments, greater care is needed to strengthen future evaluations and conduct such assessments away from the policy cheerleaders.     

The Public–Private Distinction: Insights for Public Administration from the State Action Doctrine

Public administration scholars continue to grapple with how and why public organizations differ from private organizations. The judiciary deals with similar questions in ruling on constitutional claims that apply exclusively to state actors. The authors consider similarities and differences between scholarly and judicial approaches, adding to the body of research attempting to capture the complexities of the public–private distinction. The application in this article includes the coding of seminal court decisions and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to find combinations of causal conditions that lead to state action rulings. The specifics revealed through QCA provide valuable lessons for extending public norms and preserving constitutional protections when outsourcing public services.     

培养式选拔：干部晋升的一种解释框架

组织培养既是具有中国特色的政治实践,也是中国选贤任能的标识性概念。在党管干部的原则下,中国共产党有计划、有目的地选拔一批有潜力的培养对象进行组织培养。组织培养是培养对象获得仕途晋升的中介变量。培养式选拔是指优秀的年轻干部经过中国共产党早期挑选后,作为培养对象进行组织培养的过程。文章通过访谈、数据爬取和案例收集,对组织培养进行过程考察,发现现有的培养方式包括核心部门历练、挂职锻炼、轮岗交流、借调使用、教育培训等。培养式选拔有助于培养对象将组织培养转化为晋升优势。培养对象晋升优势的产生机制包括以下几个方面:晋升速率快而占据年龄优势;多岗位历练而占据素质优势;领导关注而占据领导注意力分配优势;职业预期高而形成自我激励和自我约束优势;社会关注度大而形成社会监督优势。     

Public–Private Partnerships in Urban Infrastructures: Reconciling Private Sector Participation and Sustainability

The speed and scale of urbanization provide serious challenges for governments all over the world with regard to the realization, maintenance, and operation of public urban infrastructures. These infrastructures are needed to keep up with living standards and to create conditions for sustainable development. The lack of public funds and the inefficiencies of public service provision have given rise to initiatives to stimulate private parties to invest their resources in public urban infrastructures. However, private sector participation creates a whole range of new challenges. The potential benefits are countered by concerns about the compatibility of the private sector's focus on short-term return on investment with the long-term perspective needed to realize sustainability targets. On the basis of a review of literature on experiences with private sector participation in urban infrastructure projects, this article identifies governance practices that help or hinder the reconciliation of private sector participation in urban infrastructure projects with the objective to increase the sustainability of the urban environment.     

加压式减负:基层减负难的一个解释性框架

基层减负是加强基层治理现代化建设的重要议题。对珠三角A镇的实地调研显示:基层减负取得了一定的成效,但基层工作人员的减负获得感仍然不强,工作压力有增无减,加班加点仍是常态,无效劳动时间越来越长。“加压式减负”的解释框架有助于理解基层负担“越减越负”的悖论:基层减负难,难在做形式主义减法的同时不断地做实质性职责扩张的加法,加压环境的刚性存在使基层处于一种任务超载而资源匮乏的境地,进而造成基层形式主义应对方式的蔓延。基层减负,不是要减少基层政府的工作量,而是要厘清政府与市场、政府与社会的边界,优化纵向政府间权责资源配置,完善基层工作激励约束机制,真正使基层更好地把工作重心落到为公众服务上来。