Political drivers of and barriers to Public-Private Partnerships: The role of political involvement

The application and design of public-private partnerships between the extremes of purely public or purely private task fulfilment in public services is, in practice, subject to political processes. Decisions about PPPs (realisation, arrangement) are taken in the political arena and are therefore not theoretical optimisation exercises. The interests and resources of the actors who participate in the political decision-making process as well as the rules of the political process have a powerful influence on whether, in what areas, and in what form PPPs are realised. The distance between this output and solutions that are theoretically desirable given certain ideal goals (e.g. efficiency) and conditions can be referred to as political bias. So what role does the political process play in the realisation of PPPs, in the actual design of PPPs, and in their performance? Using public choice and institutional economics theory this paper analyses what chances of success PPPs have given the existing decision-making structures and the inherent incentives for participating actors, and in what way political influence is brought to bear in the first place. Furthermore, aspects of political science in this field (legitimacy, democratic control) are considered as well. Using PPPs there might be a trade-off between reduced democratic control, but also reinforced market control. It turns out that political involvement might be both an important driver as well as an obstacle for (efficient) PPPs and that it is likely to decrease efficiency either way. A case study for userfinancing PPPs in the transport sector highlights the problems of political renitency.

[1]  Ansgar Belke,et al.  Finanzkrise, globale Liquidität und makroökonomischer Exit , 2010 .

[2]  O. Hart,et al.  Incomplete Contracts and Renegotiation , 1988 .

[3]  J. Bogumil Ökonomisierung der Verwaltung. Konzepte, Praxis, Auswirkungen und Probleme einer effizienzorientierten Verwaltungsmodernisierung , 2004 .

[4]  E. Gawel Nutzerfinanzierung öffentlicher Aufgaben – Renaissance des Entgeltstaates? , 2013 .

[5]  Graeme Hodge,et al.  The Challenge of Public–Private Partnerships , 2005 .

[6]  W. Niskanen Bureaucracy and representative government , 1971 .

[7]  Christopher Kaan,et al.  Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations: Making Sense of Concepts, Research Frameworks, and Results , 2009 .

[8]  Aidan R. Vining,et al.  Public‐private partnerships in Canada: Theory and evidence , 2008 .

[9]  J. Buchanan,et al.  The power to tax : analytical foundations of a fiscal constitution , 1981 .

[10]  Incomplete Contracts in Public Procurement , 2001 .

[11]  K. Schedler,et al.  New Public Management , 2011 .

[12]  J. T. Bennett,et al.  Off-budget activities of local government: The bane of the tax revolt , 1982 .

[13]  Praveen K. Kopalle,et al.  The impact of external reference price on consumer price expectations , 2003 .

[14]  E. Gawel Private Finanzierung von Fernstraßen – Erfahrungen und Probleme , 2005 .

[15]  David N King,et al.  The Private Finance Initiative in the UK , 2007 .

[16]  Gebhard Kirchgässner,et al.  Towards a theory of low-cost decisions , 1992 .

[17]  Belén Villalonga Privatization and efficiency: differentiating ownership effects from political, organizational, and dynamic effects , 2000 .

[18]  Gordon Tullock,et al.  The Politics of Bureaucracy. , 1966 .

[19]  Thomas W. Ross,et al.  The Economics of Public-Private Partnerships , 2004 .

[20]  E. Savas,et al.  Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships , 1999 .

[21]  E. Sadka Public-Private Partnerships: A Public Economics Perspective , 2006, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[22]  Tanja A. Börzel,et al.  Public-Private Partnerships: Effective and Legitimate Tools of International Governance? , 2002 .

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[24]  Scot Burton,et al.  Distinguishing Coupon Proneness from Value Consciousness: An Acquisition-Transaction Utility Theory Perspective , 1990 .

[25]  Richard H. Thaler,et al.  Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice , 1985, Mark. Sci..

[26]  The Hold-Up Problem in Government Contracting , 1996 .

[27]  Gérard Roland,et al.  Markets and Hierarchies , 2016 .

[28]  Gabriel Obermann The Role of the State as Guarantor of Public Services: Transaction Cost Issues and Empirical Evidence , 2007 .

[29]  Public Private Partnership: Theoretische Bezüge und praktische Strukturierung , 2007 .

[30]  J. Knight A Pragmatist Approach to the Proper Scope of Government , 2001 .

[31]  Timo Valila How expensive are cost savings? On the economics of public-private partnerships , 2005 .

[32]  J. T. Bennett Underground Government: The Off-Budget Public Sector , 1983 .

[33]  R. Coase The Nature of the Firm , 1937 .

[34]  Klaus M. Schmidt,et al.  Option Contracts and Renegotiation - A Solution to the Hold-Up Problem , 1995 .

[35]  Mervyn K. Lewis,et al.  The Economics of Public Private Partnerships , 2005 .

[36]  Mathias Dewatripont,et al.  Public-private partnerships: contract design and risk transfer , 2005 .

[37]  D. Mueller Public Choice III: What have we learned? , 1979 .

[38]  V. Schneider,et al.  Politikfeldanalyse : Akteure, Diskurse und Netzwerke in der öffentlichen Politik , 2006 .

[39]  Lakshman Krishnamurthi,et al.  A comparative analysis of reference price models , 1997 .

[40]  Alexander Galetovic,et al.  Soft Budgets and Renegotiations in Public-Private Partnerships , 2009 .