Next Article in Journal
Biomass Power Generation Investment in China: A Real Options Evaluation
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Thermal Bridges in Insulated Walls on Air-Conditioning Loads Using Whole Building Energy Analysis
Article

Evaluation of the Promotion of Through-Life Management in Public Private Partnerships for Infrastructure

by 1,†, 2,† and 3,*,†
1
School of Art, Design and Architecture, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH, UK
2
Independent Scholar, Manchester, UK
3
Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen AB10 7GJ, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Academic Editor: Giuseppe Ioppolo
Sustainability 2016, 8(6), 552; https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060552
Received: 15 November 2015 / Revised: 19 May 2016 / Accepted: 23 May 2016 / Published: 16 June 2016
(This article belongs to the Section Economic and Business Aspects of Sustainability)
One justification of public private partnerships (PPP) is the alleged benefit they offer in terms of through-life management (TLM). Aiming at an evaluation of this claim, the dominant reasoning connecting PPPs and TLM is first defined: In creating a single point of responsibility and a long temporal involvement, the PPP model provides an effective incentive to implement TLM. This reasoning is first evaluated through prior large scale studies and through two case studies undertaken by the authors. No substantial evidence of TLM benefits is found. To identify the causes for this gap between intention and achievement, a critical review of the PPP literature supported by insights from management and organization theory is undertaken. Four problems in the reasoning are found to explain the gap: fragmentation is factually prevailing; not all parties in PPPs intend to have a long term commitment to the project; there may be competing incentives for some parties; and the effort to achieve the change and learning necessary for TLM may be missing. It is concluded that for the TLM benefits to be achieved, the PPP model has to be redesigned to secure incentivisation towards TLM and to incorporate TLM mechanisms at the level of the production system. View Full-Text
Keywords: through-life management; public-private partnerships; private finance initiative; infrastructure procurement through-life management; public-private partnerships; private finance initiative; infrastructure procurement
MDPI and ACS Style

Koskela, L.; Rooke, J.; Siriwardena, M. Evaluation of the Promotion of Through-Life Management in Public Private Partnerships for Infrastructure. Sustainability 2016, 8, 552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060552

AMA Style

Koskela L, Rooke J, Siriwardena M. Evaluation of the Promotion of Through-Life Management in Public Private Partnerships for Infrastructure. Sustainability. 2016; 8(6):552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060552

Chicago/Turabian Style

Koskela, Lauri, John Rooke, and Mohan Siriwardena. 2016. "Evaluation of the Promotion of Through-Life Management in Public Private Partnerships for Infrastructure" Sustainability 8, no. 6: 552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060552

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop