Making sense of public-private partnerships (p3s)
| Pages | 191-207 |
| Published date | 01 March 2016 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-16-02-2016-B002 |
| Date | 01 March 2016 |
| Author | Lawrence L. Martin |
| Subject Matter | Public policy & environmental management,Politics,Public adminstration & management,Government,Economics,Public Finance/economics,Texation/public revenue |
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT, VOLUME 16, ISSUE 2, 191-207 SUMMER 2016
MAKING SENSE OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS (P3s)
Lawrence L. Martin *
ABSTRACT. This article argues t hat confusion exists as to exactly what
constitutes a public-private partnership (P3). This confusion, it is
maintained, creates problems for public procurement professionals when
advising elected officials and government administrators on the appropriate
uses of P3s. The article looks first at the imprecise language used by
organizations (governments and others) to define, describe and discuss
P3s. A proposed consensus definition of P3s is then introduced together
with an accompanying proposed taxonomy of P3 types. The article then
demonstrates how the proposed consensus definition and taxonomy can
bring more clarity to discussions about P3s and their uses. The article
concludes by suggesting that some public procurement standard setting
organization should undertake the task of developing and promulgating
more prescriptive guidance on P3s.
INTRODUCTION
Several months ago, a regional symposium on public- private
partnerships (P3s) was held in Florida. The symposium was organized
by a non-governmental organization with purported expertise in P3s.
The audience was comprised of elected officials, government
administrators, business leaders and a few interested citizens. The
keynote speaker, a high level federal official, talked about several
P3 projects he had recently been involved with. It quickly became
apparent (at least to this author) that the speaker was not talking
about P3s, but rather public-private competitions (PPCs), the federal
government’s approach to contracting out under Office of
Management & Budget (OMB) Circular A-76. When asked about the
----------------------------------
* Lawrence L. Martin, Ph.D., is Professor of public affairs at the University
of Central Florida in Orlando. His research interest s are in public
procurement and government contracting and public-private partnerships
(P3s).
Copyright © 2016 by PrAcademics Press
192 MARTIN
obvious disconnect between the topic of the symposium (P3s) and
the keynote speaker’s remarks on PPCs, the conference organizer
replied, “P3s, PPCs, contracting, privatization, outsourcing, it’s all
the same.”
As the vignette above suggests, confusion exists about what P3s
are, and just as importantly, what they are not. It can be argued that
this confusion is due in large measure to the imprecise language
used by organizations (governments and others) to define, describe
and discuss P3s. For example, organizations and governments,
and in particular state legislatures, are developing P3 definitions,
policies and procedures in piecemeal fashion with little apparent
input from public procurement professionals. The result is that the
current P3 language does as much to obfuscate as it does to
clarify. Contracts for the construction of public facilities are
increasingly referred to as P3s. Contracts between government and
the business sector for the delivery of public services (e. g., solid
waste collection, janitorial, parks and recreation and others) are
also increasingly referred to as P3s (Campbell & DiSesa, 2014;
Busch & Givens, 2012). In many instances, grants between
government agencies and nonprofit organizations to provide health
and human services are also called P3s (NCJP, 2014; Mitchel, nd;
Montiel, 2004). Apparently today, any dealings between
governments and the business or nonprofit sectors can be called P3s
without fear of contradiction.
Because of their importance today (e. g., Brookings Institute,
2014; Kelly, 2014; Eno Center for Transportation, 2014; Sabol &
Puentes, 2014; U. S. House of Representatives, 2014; Vinogradov,
Shadrina & Kokareva, 2014; DiNapoli, 2013; Martin, Lawther,
Hodge, & Greve, 2013; Verma, 2010), the confusion over what P3s
are, and what they are not, is particularly distressing. Moody’s
Investor Service (2014) as well as the American International Group
(AIG) (McNichol, 2013) both predict that the United States is poised
to become the world’s largest P3 market. Consequently, a need
exists to better understand what P3s are.
EXPLORING THE LANDSCAPE OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS (P3S)
Hodge and Greve (2010), two leading international researchers
in the field, suggest that the term “P3s” has little real meaning.
They argue that P3s represent a sort of “language game” used to
To continue reading
Request your trial