Critics: the private sector only takes a short-term view
Infrastructure evolves through time. It must be constantly maintained and upgraded..
Infrastructure evolves through time. It must be constantly maintained and upgraded.
The investment, committed throughout the life cycle of the project, enables the public authority, with its limited resources, to continue its development and provide people with useful, modern infrastructure and facilities.
The PPP, a very long-term partnership
Example: a study found that, overall, public authorities are satisfied with the quality-to-price ratio of partnership contracts. Indeed, 80% of public decision-makers surveyed stated they are moderately satisfied. Of these, 67% were satisfied or very satisfied (Saussier, 2012). The quality of service provided on French motorways under concession is also unanimously recognised (annual survey of users produces an overall 7.9/10 satisfaction rating).
Because the private partner is free to propose new ideas to the public authority, which remains the sole decision-maker, it is de facto positioned to take a long-term view.
By adopting the PPP model, the public authority can spread its debt over time
Public decision-makers are generally satisfied with PPPs
- Everyone has an opinion but who know exactly what a PPP is?
- Why assign the management of public infrastructure to the private sector?
- Critics: PPPs bring no benefits
- Critics: PPPs are expensive
- Critics: PPPs are a threat to SMEs
- Critics: PPPs are a “time bomb” for public finances
- Critics: the private sector only takes a short-term view
- Critics: the PPP financing method is totally incomprehensible
- Critics: PPPs sometimes have a bad image
- PPPs: a French model applied only in France?