Syndicate content

procurement

Why we need more systematic data to get PPPs right

Fernanda Ruiz Nunez's picture


Photo: Bannafarsai_Stock | Shutterstock

A few years ago, I participated in a meeting to discuss best practices in Public-Private Partnership (PPP) regulation. There was no shortage of examples. In fact, PPP practitioners were eager to share their experiences from countries around the world, but we did not have a systematic way to make all that information accessible to policy makers. Moreover, at the time, I kept thinking that there were many more good examples beyond those we were sharing at the meeting.

The lack of systematic data on the quality of PPP regulation was a serious issue. What we needed was a comprehensive, systematic way to go beyond individual examples. How could we collect available information, organize it in a rigorous and systematic way, and make it all accessible to policy makers?

Getting to financial close on PPPs: Aligning transaction advisor payment terms with project success

Marc-André Roy's picture


Photo: Jakob Montrasio | Flickr Creative Commons

Getting to commercial close on a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) transaction is a major milestone. But the deal is far from done. Getting from commercial close to financial close involves satisfying a long list of PPP contract Conditions Precedent, the terms, and conditions of lenders, among other requirements. The process is tricky and involves a lot of heavy lifting, particularly in emerging markets where the market for PPPs and supporting institutional structures may not yet be robust. None of this is news.   

Yet too often, good PPPs are jeopardized by inadequate resourcing beyond achieving commercial close —especially in emerging markets. CPCS has experienced this firsthand as transaction advisors advising governments on PPP deals in developing economies.

Kenya’s new railway and the emergence of the “government-to-government procurement” method

Cynthia Olotch's picture


Photo Credit: Xing Yihang | CRIENGLISH.com

Kenya recently launched its high-capacity, high-speed standard gauge railway (SGR) for passenger and freight transportation, which currently runs from the coastal city of Mombasa to the capital city, Nairobi. The SGR replaces the meter gauge railway passenger line that was constructed during the British colonial period that was commonly referred to as the lunatic express.

The Kenyan SGR is part of a proposed wider regional network for the development of railway connecting Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and South Sudan. Each of these countries is expected to develop the part of the railway line falling within its borders. Kenya is ahead of the pack, being the first country in the region to operationalize the SGR.

The SGR is Kenya’s largest infrastructure project since the country gained independence from the British colonialists in 1963. From a public-private partnership (PPP) perspective, the SGR is a unique project for various reasons:

Five actions governments can take now to encourage private investment in infrastructure

Laurence Carter's picture


Of the 56 poorest countries, over half had no private investment in infrastructure in the past five years. And in 2015, only 14 energy, transport and water projects involving private investment were concluded in that whole group of 56 countries—with all of them occurring in just eight of the countries. In the past five years, only one country – Bangladesh – has seen private investment in infrastructure each year. Given that well-structured private infrastructure projects can bring a useful infusion of management (and sometimes money) to help provide better quality and access to infrastructure services, this seems like a missed opportunity. Here are five suggestions for actions that governments can take immediately to improve their chances of attracting good quality private management and financing for some infrastructure services.

Measure it to improve it: How benchmarking government capability for PPPs can help improve infrastructure delivery

Clive Harris's picture


It’s widely acknowledged that how well governments prepare, procure and implement public-private partnership (PPP) projects is important both in bringing in private finance and/or expertise and ensuring these projects deliver value-for-money.
 
However, up until now there has been no systematic data to measure those capabilities in governments. This has changed with the release of the World Bank Group’s Benchmarking PPP Procurement 2017, which collects and presents comparable and actionable data on PPP procurement on a large scale by providing an assessment of the regulatory frameworks that govern PPP procurement across 82 economies. It presents an analysis of practices in four areas: preparation, procurement, contract management of PPPs, and management of unsolicited proposals (USPs). Using a highway transport project as a case study to ensure cross-comparability, it analyzes the national regulatory frameworks and presents a picture of the procurement landscape at the end of March 2016 by scoring each of the four areas.  

Preventing renegotiation, fostering efficiency

Rui Monteiro's picture
Lawyers usually say that “the best contract is the one you never have to pull out of the drawer” — a view that focuses on trust, common understanding and mutual advantages. And then they will add that public-private partnership (PPP) contracts, even with the best government–business relationship, are a bit more complex. That’s because they are based on incentive mechanisms that require not only regular monitoring, but also some degree of cooperation and a modicum of strategic management — the three components of PPP contract management.
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The ultimate success of a PPP contract depends on effective service delivery under conditions of sustained efficiency. The efficiency comes from linking private operator rewards to performance over the long-term (output focus), and from providing credible commitment by the private partner through private finance (or, as it’s known in some circles, “hostage capital”).
There are many cases, as seen in previous issues of Handshake, of PPPs providing high-quality reliable service to users at a reasonable cost for users and taxpayers. But there is also recognition that, over the long-term, PPP efficiency may be jeopardized by contract renegotiation — by necessity renegotiation under no competitive pressure, with asymmetrical information.

This sort of renegotiation creates a risk of breaking the initial commitment, changing rewards and risk allocation. Though theoretical economists would say 
that “in the long-term” renegotiation of incomplete contracts is unavoidable, PPP practitioners should do their best in order to avoid the need for renegotiation, while simultaneously preparing for renegotiation when it is the best solution in terms of public interest.