Motivations for adopting unsolicited proposals for public-private partnership project implementation: A survey of international experts

Osei-Kyei, R; Chan, A P C; Dansoh, A; Ofori-Kuragu, J K and Owusu, E K (2018) Motivations for adopting unsolicited proposals for public-private partnership project implementation: A survey of international experts. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 23(2), pp. 221-238. ISSN 1366-4387

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the motivations of governments for adopting unsolicited proposals for public–private partnership (PPP) project implementation. Design/methodology/approach: A comprehensive review of literature was conducted to derive a list of motivations for adopting unsolicited PPPs. Subsequently, an empirical questionnaire survey was conducted with international PPP experts. Inter-rater agreement analysis, mean significance index and independent two-sample t-test were used for data analysis. Findings: Results reveal four very critical motivations for governments' interest in unsolicited PPPs; these include: “enhanced private sector innovation and creativity in PPPs”; “lack of public sector capacity to identify, prioritise and procure projects”; “lack of private investors'/developers' interest in projects at remote areas”; and “rapid implementation of PPP projects”. Further analysis shows that developing and developed countries view the significance of three motivations differently. Research limitations/implications: The major limitation lies in the fact that this study only focused on the general motivations/rationale for using unsolicited PPP proposals and did not thoroughly examine and consider the inherent property of motivations (i.e. push and pull theories). Therefore, future studies should explore the “pull and push” motivations for adopting unsolicited PPPs within a specific country or region. Originality/value: The research outputs inform international private developers of the key expectations of governments/public departments when submitting unsolicited PPP proposals for consideration by the public sector. Furthermore, the outputs will enable governments/public departments and private proponents to derive performance objectives and standards for unsolicited PPP projects.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: developed countries; developing countries; government motivations; international survey; public-private partnerships; unsolicited proposals
Index terms: inter-rater agreement analysis, partnership, private sector, public sector, investor, creativity, implementation, future study, survey, research output, motivation, proposal, developing country, developing and developed country, international survey, data analysis, methodology, developed country, questionnaire
Subjects: innovation and creative processes, administrative law, industry analysis, sociology, partnership management, development economics, research methods, economic development, project planning, data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, research products and data, psychology, research design and methodology, data collection methods
Topics: Legal Issues, Design Practice, International Construction, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Procurement
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here