Alim, S and Polak, J (2016) Public-private partnerships for future urban infrastructure. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 169(4), pp. 150-158. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
This paper recognises that future infrastructure delivery presents new challenges primarily from constraints on public financing (creating the need for private funding) and the evolving vision for urban development to be smart, sustainable and socially inclusive. This paper focuses on public-private partnerships for financing of future infrastructure. Lessons learned from past failures of public-private partnerships suggest that a delivery strategy tailored for their successful implementation is required. This strategy would make the public sector responsible for developing the preliminary design and a robust understanding of the related technical, financial and regulatory requirements before initiating procurement; it recommends use of standardised tools for greater consistency and transparency in project evaluation and that the project delivery entity must represent a true partnership between the public and private sectors. The public sector has a responsibility to safeguard public interest and ensure transparent procurement and sustainable, socially inclusive and smart development. These objectives are often in conflict with the private sector's profit maximisation goals, and the challenge is creating the entity that allows the two sectors to coexist and meet their goals collaboratively. This paper looks at a joint ownership company as a vehicle for a more collaborative and equal public-private partnership.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | procurement; public-private partnerships; sustainability |
| Index terms: | ownership, urban development, funding, project delivery, project evaluation, transparency, implementation, public interest, public sector, private sector, partnership, financing, preliminary design, lessons learned, maximization, urban infrastructure, profit, infrastructure delivery, strategy |
| Subjects: | algorithms, urban design, contractual arrangements, strategic project management, economic analysis, design practice, management, economics, professional development, partnership management, administrative law, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, political science, value management, project delivery |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Procurement, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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