TY - JOUR
T1 - Value for Money Assessments for Public-Private Partnerships: characteristics, research directions, and policy implications
AU - Zhao, Jianfeng
AU - Liu, Henry
AU - Love, Peter
AU - Greenwood, David
AU - Sing, Michael
N1 - Funding Information:
The PSC, as addressed above, is a form of cost-oriented evaluation, overlooking a series of social and environmental benefits (i.e., creation of job opportunities and environmental impacts) ( Ng et al., 2012 ; Peng and Liu, 2013 ). For instance, the PSC was applied to justify the approach used to deliver the M1-A1 project in the UK. The main reason for choosing the build-finance-operate model was to obtain a cost-saving of £84 m, provided by the private sector's financial contribution ( Mackie and Smith, 2005 ). In contrast, the CBA can perform an overarching evaluation covering both costs/economic risks and social benefits ( Decorla-Souza et al., 2013 ). By integrating traffic forecasts and revenue analysis, CBA provides decision-makers with a clear pathway to whether a project should move to its next stage of development ( Cruz and Sarmento, 2020 ). For example, the French government applied this approach when deciding whether its high-speed rail line (HSRL) would pass through the suburb of ‘Métropoles du Sud’ or ‘Côte d'Azur’. Due to higher ridership forecasts, ' Métropoles du Sud’ was chosen ( Hyard, 2012 ). Of note, major transport projects funded by the European Union are explicitly required to conduct a rigorous CBA ( The European Commission, 2014 ).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023
PY - 2023/10/7
Y1 - 2023/10/7
N2 - Value for Money (VfM) has been used as a critical criterion for evaluating Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), a popular procurement strategy for delivering transport infrastructure assets. However, there is a tendency for prevailing VfM techniques (e.g., Public Sector Comparator, PSC) to focus on obtaining cost savings rather than value per se. Despite the criticisms of the PSC and its alternatives for assessing VfM, there remains no research comparing decision-making methods for procuring transport infrastructure projects. In this instance, the upshot has been the public sector's inability to safeguard and deliver VfM to their taxpayers. Against this backdrop, we systematically review the VfM assessment literature to understand the effectiveness (e.g., strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) of prevailing approaches used to determine the ‘value’ of transport projects. In light of our review, we propose and introduce the concept of the ‘onion’ architecture to improve the decision-making practice of PPPs, which comprises four systematic future research directions and policy implications. To this end, our paper provides a platform for developing new procurement paradigms that can be used to future-proof transport infrastructure assets.
AB - Value for Money (VfM) has been used as a critical criterion for evaluating Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), a popular procurement strategy for delivering transport infrastructure assets. However, there is a tendency for prevailing VfM techniques (e.g., Public Sector Comparator, PSC) to focus on obtaining cost savings rather than value per se. Despite the criticisms of the PSC and its alternatives for assessing VfM, there remains no research comparing decision-making methods for procuring transport infrastructure projects. In this instance, the upshot has been the public sector's inability to safeguard and deliver VfM to their taxpayers. Against this backdrop, we systematically review the VfM assessment literature to understand the effectiveness (e.g., strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) of prevailing approaches used to determine the ‘value’ of transport projects. In light of our review, we propose and introduce the concept of the ‘onion’ architecture to improve the decision-making practice of PPPs, which comprises four systematic future research directions and policy implications. To this end, our paper provides a platform for developing new procurement paradigms that can be used to future-proof transport infrastructure assets.
KW - Public-Private Partnerships
KW - Procurement
KW - Policy
KW - Transport
KW - Value for money
KW - Value for Money
KW - Research directions
KW - Public Private Partnerships
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173242442&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.dibe.2023.100246
DO - 10.1016/j.dibe.2023.100246
M3 - Article
SN - 2666-1659
VL - 16
SP - 1
EP - 13
JO - Developments in the Built Environment
JF - Developments in the Built Environment
M1 - 100246
ER -