Skip to main content
Log in

PPPs: Public Costs and Risks for Private Profits

  • Dialogue
  • Published:
Development Aims and scope

Abstract

After the generally acknowledged failure of privatization, public–private partnerships (PPPs) have been promoted as a better means for private interests to secure lucrative rents at public expense. PPPs are supposed to reduce the fiscal burden, fill the resource gap for much needed investment to achieve economic development and to better provide infrastructure and services. These claims are grossly exaggerated in light of actual experience. The private sector, for example, is supposed to be better in risk assessment and management; but all too often, the public sector ends up bearing the bulk of the risk, worsening fiscal burdens contrary to what has been promised. Through revenue guarantees to the private partner, PPPs socialize risks, enabling private gains. PPPs in social sectors, such as health, are particularly problematic as they tend to adversely affect access, thus undermining universal health coverage. PPPs have also distorted national investment and development strategies. Thus, by and large, PPPs generally do not serve the public interest well. Hence, public alternatives, including procurement, have to be considered, before governments commit to PPPs. Instead of promoting PPPs, such as ‘blended finance’ arrangements for aid delivery, sincere development partners should empower governments through appropriate strategic capacity building and budget support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For an earlier summary of trends in PPPs and some issues involved, Jomo et al. (2015), Ahmad et al. (2014).

  2. Report of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing—Final Draft, 8 August 2014. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/4588FINALREPORTICESDF.pdf

  3. For a summary of research findings, Torchia et al. (2015).

  4. Hodge (2006: 318) argues, ‘whilst partnership notions have a long historical pedigree, the new long-term contractual form of partnership has three characteristics that deserve research: the preferential use of private finance, high level of complexity through bundled contracts, and new accountability and governance assumptions. Moreover, the first two of these characteristics have major implications for the third.’ Drawing on the research literature as well as parliamentary inquiries, he concludes that ‘the PPP tool currently lacks legitimacy in the eyes of citizens in whose name it is being employed’.

  5. Cashdan (1998). Oxfam (2014) warned that large-scale partnerships with the private sector could undermine Africans’ land rights, exacerbate inequality and damage the environment.

  6. See the comments by Dr. Elly Nyaim, the Kenya Medical Association chair. https://www.nation.co.ke/lifestyle/dn2/Brand-new-equipment-same-old-problems-equipments/957860-2621846-gykocd/index.html.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. S. Jomo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jomo, K.S., Chowdhury, A. PPPs: Public Costs and Risks for Private Profits. Development 61, 89–93 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-018-0188-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-018-0188-z

Keywords

Navigation