Harris Sr., C E (2023) Public private partnerships in infrastructure: A study on performance and equity improvement. DBA thesis, National University, USA.
Abstract
The problem addressed by this study was underperforming public-private partnerships (PPP)s in infrastructure projects as related to efficiency, efficacy, equity, or value for money (VfM). This qualitative phenomenology study aimed to establish the scale of underperformance and general success of PPP infrastructure projects, and the targeted population is in eastern Missouri of, the United States. The methodology was qualitative, and the design was phenomenology. The theoretical framework for this study was collaborative governance, and the topic was PPPs. Collaborative management exists where more citizens and groups have opportunities beyond monitoring and providing input to elected bodies. The targeted populations were managers and other actors who were part of a PPP organization in eastern Missouri. The central research question asked why PPP infrastructure projects underperform, particularly with the VfM, efficacy, and questions around sustainability and equity. The research produced compelling data that the St. Louis, Mo West National Geospatial Agency (NGA) government-private construction project was a success in terms of material delivery or output of the project. The long-term questions of the NGA project's efficacy, equity, and overall economic impact will require longitudinal research, as the data is less compelling on these factors. The VfM quantitative analysis and a public sector comparative (PSC) are the subject of debate and a subject for future research. Additionally, sustainability requires further research. Globally and annually more than 10 trillion dollars goes to infrastructure PPPs. Fifty percent of these projects fail, primarily because of a lack of knowledge and experience in both the public and private sectors on infrastructure projects. However, if governments abandon PPP arrangements, they will have to return to old and outdated project procurement processes; this is unlikely to happen. Governments today have an increasing dependence on PPPs.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Demeter, L |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | United States; economic impact; governance; government; monitoring; phenomenology; population; public private partnerships; public sector; quantitative analysis; sustainability; value for money |
| Index terms: | economic impact, construction project, population, methodology, project procurement, value-for-money, agency, quantitative analysis, United States, manager, collaborative management, monitoring, phenomenology, public private partnership, infrastructure project, governance, efficiency, public sector, private sector, partnership |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, practitioner, demography, financial analysis, research methods, production management, Geography, evaluation, data analysis and analytics, business, control systems, partnership management, sociology, administrative law, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, management, performance management, methods and analysis |
| Topics: | Value Management, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Site Management, Urban Studies, Governance, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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