Public Private Partnership (PPP) Facilitation Units: Their roles in Building PPP

Many countries now use Public Private Partnerships for developing public infrastructure or for delivering public services. Just what the term ‘Public Private Partnership’ (PPP) means, however, varies greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, as well as within the academic literature. Despite calls for a common terminology, there is little agreement internationally beyond the broad, catch-all definitions provided by such bodies as the World or Asian Development Banks or by UNESCAP or the OECD.Within countries, however, one might expect greater clarity at both national and local levels not only as to what is or is not to be considered to be a PPP, but also with regards to how PPPs are to be justified, developed, structured in terms of responsibilities and risk allocations, tendered for, awarded, financed, managed, monitored and evaluated. In many places these issues are still a matter of adhocracy. Elsewhere, however, it is recognized that without properly thought out systems and regulations, there is a real danger that strong desires to build infrastructure or develop services through PPPs may be thwarted by a lack of capacity to implement PPPs effectively. Attention is thus being given increasingly to introducing PPP-related legislation and / or developing detailed PPP policy guidelines or manuals. In some places this work maybe undertaken by private sector consultants engaged by the government, but many countries are now establishing their own specialized PPP facilitation units.This paper, based on research by the author, discusses how different jurisdictions are constructing their own official definitions of PPPs, developing formal PPP-related policies, procedures and regulations and promoting ‘best practices’. Examples will be drawn from Australia, the UK, Canada, Singapore, Malaysia, Mauritius, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Hong Kong and Thailand. Drawing upon interviews with senior officers involved in PPP related or allied units in these places and backed by documentary and literature reviews, the paper examines key issues relating to the composition, organizational location, functions, powers and limitations of specialist or dedicated PPP facilitation units and organizations. The paper suggests that striking the right balance between these issues is essential if governments are to be able genuinely to enhance their capacity to utilize PPPs effectively. In particular, how relationships between PPP facilitation units and other government organizations are structured can make a significant difference as to whether PPPs are or are not deployed appropriately and as to whether potentially damaging conflicts of interests are avoided. Further, as such facilitation units both gain experience and hopefully evaluate both PPP policy and implementation, their value as repositories of knowledge and of PPP-related skills hopefully increases. This in turn can enhance government’s abilities to improve upon their PPP performance and to engage with the private sector more effectively. The paper concludes with pointers towards enhancing PPP facilitation units’ contribution to developing best practices.