Public Private Patnerships
Public Private Patnerships
Public Private Patnerships
Reviewed by
JEFREDA R. BROWN
Fact checked by MELODY KAZEL
0 of 34 secondsVolume 0%
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Risks are distributed between the public and private partners through a process of
negotiation, ideally though not always according to the ability of each to assess,
control, and cope with them.
Although public works and services may be paid for through a fee from the public
authority's revenue budget, such as with hospital projects, concessions may involve
the right to direct users' payments—for example, with toll highways.
In cases such as shadow tolls for highways, payments are based on actual usage
of the service. When wastewater treatment is involved, payment is made with fees
collected from users.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Public-Private
Partnerships
Advantages
The public sector, for its part, provides incentives for the private sector to deliver
projects on time and within budget. In addition, creating economic diversification
makes the country more competitive in facilitating its infrastructure base and
boosting associated construction, equipment, support services, and other
businesses.
Disadvantages
There are downsides, too. The private partner may face special risks from engaging
in a public-private partnership. Physical infrastructure, such as roads or railways,
involves construction risks. If the product is not delivered on time, exceeds cost
estimates, or has technical defects, the private partner typically bears the burden.
In addition, the private partner faces availability risk if it cannot provide the service
promised. A company may not meet safety or other relevant quality standards, for
example, when running a prison, hospital, or school.
Demand risk occurs when there are fewer users than expected for the service or
infrastructure, such as toll roads, bridges, or tunnels. However, this risk can be
shifted to the public partner, if the public partner agrees to pay a minimum fee no
matter the demand.
Public-private partnerships also create risks from the general public's and
taxpayers' point of view. Private operators' partnership with the government may
insulate them from accountability to the users of the public service for cutting too
many corners, providing substandard service, or even violating peoples' civil or
Constitutional rights.
At the same time, the private partner may enjoy a position to raise tolls, rates, and
fees for captive consumers who may be compelled by law or geographic natural
monopoly to pay for their services.
Lastly, as with any situation where ownership and decision rights are separated,
public-private partnerships can create complex principal-agent problems.
This may facilitate corrupt dealings, pay-offs to political cronies, and general rent-
seeking activity. This would happen by attenuating the link between the private
parties who make important decisions over a project, from which they stand to
benefit, and accountability to the taxpayers who foot at least part of the bill and who
may be left holding the bag in terms of ultimate liability for the project's outcome.