Ole Helby Petersen

Regulation of public–private partnerships: the Danish case

The Danish government has considered the public–private partnership (PPP) model for major construction and infrastructure projects. But, whereas other countries have embraced PPPs, Denmark has been a sceptic. This article examines why PPPs have not got off the ground: a mixture of regulatory controversies among central government departments and strong public finances (making private finance largely redundant). Two case studies from the schools sector illustrate the regulatory difficulties that public and private partners face when engaging in PPP activity in Denmark. The author concludes that clear regulations are needed to support PPPs.

How Do Governments Support the Development of Public Private Partnerships? Measuring and Comparing PPP Governmental Support in 20 European Countries

Abstract Taking an institutional perspective, in this article we develop an index of the governmental support for public private partnership (PPP) — a ‘PPP Governmental Support Index’ (GSI) — which aims to measure the extent to which national governments provide an institutional framework that is either conducive or preventive for the introduction and diffusion of PPPs within transport infrastructure and other sectors. First, based on a substantive review of the literature, we define the elements of the PPP GSI, including the policy and political commitment regarding PPPs, the legal and regulatory framework, and the presence/absence of dedicated PPP-supporting arrangements. Second, we calculate the PPP GSI for 20 European countries, cluster them and compare similarities and differences in national governmental support of infrastructure PPPs. Third, we explore the potential link between national institutional index scores and infrastructure PPP activity in the 20 countries. Lastly, we discuss the potential and usefulness of the presented PPP GSI, as well as methodological limitations, and elaborate on how this index might be utilised to strengthen future comparative research on PPP in transport and other sectors.

Is Contracting Out Good or Bad for Employees? A Review of International Experience

The past decades have witnessed an upsurge in governments’ use of contracting out as a means of reforming and privatizing public service delivery. This development has to a large extent been driven by efficiency and cost-effectiveness concerns, but may also result in important changes in the working conditions and work environment for the personnel in public organizations. In this article, we present the findings from a systematic review of studies documenting the consequences of contracting out for employees. The review is based on 26 empirical studies published between 2000 and 2012. We find both positive and negative effects for employees documented in the literature, although with a predominance of negative effects, including reductions in the workforce and other changes in the workforce composition such as the replacement of experienced employees with younger workers, poorer working conditions, lower salaries, fewer benefits, and reduced job satisfaction. We conclude that poorer conditions for the public service personnel are well documented as a short-term consequence of contracting out, while more studies covering a longer time-span are needed to assess whether the predominantly negative effects are transitory or will persist over time.

PPP projects in transport: evidence from light rail projects in Spain

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) have been extensively used in Spain for the procurement of light rail systems. This paper analyses five projects that have been in operation for more than five years. The authors examine the reasoning behind the selection of the PPP projects, risk-sharing mechanisms, competition among private providers, and overall cost-effectiveness. The paper demonstrates a need for more rigorous assessments of the merits of PPP projects before they are initiated.

National Varieties of Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs): A Comparative Analysis of PPP-Supporting Units in 19 European Countries

Abstract Most countries that have adopted the public–private partnership (PPP) model as a means of implementing infrastructure projects have launched dedicated supporting units to guide policy development and stimulate project implementation. This paper draws on the theoretical notion of PPP-enabling fields to carry out a comparative analysis of the roles and functions of PPP-supporting units across 19 European countries with varying PPP experiences. We distinguish four categories of national support of PPPs, from skeptical systems of zero support to full-fledged PPP systems. Furthermore, we take initial steps to analyze the possible link between national differences in institutionalized PPP support and the amount of implemented PPP projects. Finally, pathways for further research on PPP-supporting units are discussed.

Bundling and Unbundling in Public–Private Partnerships: Implications for Risk Sharing in Urban Transport Projects

Public–private partnership (PPP) projects may be organized in a variety of ways, depending on the level of integration of the so-called Special Purpose Vehicle. Based on the analyses of four major PPP light rail projects in Spain, this article outlines two fundamentally different models of organizing the Special Purpose Vehicle in PPP projects; moreover, the article examines the central principles of these two different models of organizing the private sector Special Purpose Vehicle and their implications for risk sharing and project management in large-scale infrastructure PPP projects.

The Role of Private Actors in Public Sector Innovation

The changing forms of governance stemming from the rise of New Public Management (NPM) and New Public Governance (NPG) have brought about significant changes in the relationship between the public and private sectors (Christensen and Laegreid 2007; Torfing and Triantafillou 2013). Not only have we witnessed a gradual increase in the involvement of private actors in the provision of public services, but we have also seen an upsurge of new forms of public–private interaction based on quasi-markets, partnerships and networks.This development, which has unfolded over the past four decades, entails two parallel but distinct trends. First, the gradual replacement of public with private solutions across a broad range of services, such as health, eldercare, employment services and childcare, many of which are services that have traditionally been seen as the family silver of the modern welfare state. While this trend has developed incrementally, it has nonetheless resulted in significant transfers of activities from the public to the private domain (Petersen and Hjelmar 2013). Second, we have witnessed the emergence of a growing number of innovation-oriented forms of public–private interaction under catchy titles such as ‘public–private partnerships’ (PPPs) (Hodge and Greve 2005), ‘public procurement of innovation’ (Lember, Kattel and Kalvet 2014), ‘innovative contracting out’ (Lindholst and Bogetoft 2011) and ‘public–private innovation partnerships’ (Brogaard and Petersen 2014). Today, perhaps more than ever before, there is a search for new forms of public–private collaboration that have the potential for delivering efficient public services, enhancing innovation and safeguarding public value in its widest sense (Moore 1995).This chapter examines how governments can enhance public sector innovation by utilizing new as well as old forms of public–private interaction that mobilizes the knowledge, competencies and resources of the private sector. We focus on three major yet distinct forms of public and private interplay: contracting out, public procurement and public–private partnerships (PPPs). The aim is to examine how these widely used interaction forms fit into the emerging NPG paradigm and how they can contribute to enhanced innovation, learning and collaboration under the evolving NPG framework.As outlined by the editors in Chapter 1 of the book, innovation and learning are embedded into collective action and institutions governing the public–private collaboration.

Marketization trajectories in the Danish road and park sectors: A story of incremental institutional change

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to improve the understanding of the evolution of marketization in the public sector as a process of institutional change. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on a study of marketization and gradual changes in the involvement of private contractors (as providers of maintenance services) in the municipal road and park sectors in Denmark over the past 30 years. The study draws theoretically on historical institutionalism as an interpretive framework and empirically on findings from earlier research, register data from municipal accounts as well as new survey data. Findings – Marketization within the road and park sectors has historically taken place through gradual changes, in particular by processes of layering and displacement, which has added up to substantial transformations in both sectors. Transformations relate to the levels of private sector involvement, the purpose of using private contractors, the extent of competition and the design of contractual arrangements. The road sector has been a frontrunner in this marketization process, while the park sector increasingly has been “catching up.” Originality/value – The paper contributes to the understanding of the historical development and differential pathways of marketization within the public sector. In particular, the study highlights how pathways of gradual change, spurred by the influx of long-term policy pressures, over time can lead to substantial institutional transformations.

Strategic use of public-private cooperation in the Nordic region

The Nordic welfare states are facing significant demographic challenges now and in the future. At the same time life expectancy of the citizens is increasing. Thus more senior citizens need to be c ...

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) in local services: risk-sharing and private delivery of water services in Spain

ABSTRACT Local governments are increasingly utilising the public–private partnership (PPP) model as a means of organising service delivery in the public–private domain. This article examines the experiences with construction and operation of 131 PPP wastewater treatment plants in the region of Aragon, Spain. The study highlights how an inadequate management of construction risk and unsuitable transfer of demand and revenue risk resulted in significant time delays in execution of the PPP projects. The research also shows how the involvement of public bodies at local, regional and national level further added to the complexity of implementing the projects. The findings contribute to the literature on local service delivery and provide insights regarding risk transfer in long-term PPP contracts for the delivery of local services in general and water services in particular.