Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning to contract in public–private partnerships for road infrastructure: recent experiences in Belgium

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are known as challenging contractual endeavors to public sector managers, and governments are developing standard contracts in order to ease the contracting process toward PPP deals. This study examines the learning process governments go through while managing the procurement trajectories of PPPs over time and revising the model contract they use, thereby gradually moving toward the formulation of a standard contract. It presents a case study of four consecutive road infrastructure projects in Belgium that looks into the contractual changes that were made over time and explains the reasons behind those changes. The results indicate a learning process that is characterized by an open attitude to learning of public sector actors, and a leading role of private sector actors—primarily financiers—in proposing or even requiring change. Contrary to theory-based expectations, the government continuously tested whether its model contract was in line with market practice, rather than increasingly limiting the room for negotiation as it gained experience.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Learning as in ‘the acquisition of new knowledge by actors who are able and willing to apply that knowledge in making decisions’ (Miller 1996).

  2. Flanders, also known as the Flemish Region, is the northern part of Belgium.

  3. Due to a different tendering approach than the first three projects, the contractual agreement on the fourth project included a number of clauses that had not been used in the agreements on the preceding projects. In order to make the fourth project fully comparable with the other three projects, I have not taken into consideration those highly project-specific clauses. Instead, I have focused my study on clauses that would be applicable regardless of the degree of project specificity.

  4. While making this comparison, I controlled for clauses that were included, changed, or excluded merely due to a different procurement approach (‘Insurance,’ ‘Intellectual Property Rights’) or project specificity (‘Guideline for adapting financial model,’ ‘Financial close certificate’). Including these clauses would have skewed the analytical results.

  5. Eurostat is the Directorate-General of the European Commission that is responsible for providing statistical information to EU institutions and member states and promoting the harmonization of statistical methods across Europe.

References

  • Akintoye, A., & Beck, M. (2009). Policy, management and finance for public-private partnerships. London/Oxford: Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors/Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyres, N., Bercovitz, J., & Mayer, K. J. (2007). Complementarity and evolution of contractual provisions: an empirical study of IT services contracts. Organization Science, 18(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariño, A., Reuer, J. J., Mayer, K. J., & Jané, J. (2014). Contracts, negotiation, and learning: An examination of termination provisions. Journal of Management Studies, 51(3), 379–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, P., Doussard, M., & Weber, R. (2012). The financial engineering of infrastructure privatization. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(3), 300–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazeley, P. (2007). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belgian Court of Audit. (2009). Publiek-private samenwerking bij de Vlaamse overheid. Verslag van het Rekenhof aan het Vlaams Parlement. Brussels: Belgian Court of Audit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouckaert, G., Peters, G., & Verhoest, K. (2010). The coordination of public sector organizations: shifting patterns of public management. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative data: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. L., & Potoski, M. (2003). Contract-management capacity in municipal and county governments. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. L., Potoski, M., & Van Slyke, D. M. (2010). Contracting for complex products. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(suppl 1), i41–i58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. L., Potoski, M., & Van Slyke, D. M. (2015). Managing complex contracts: A theoretical approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. doi:10.1093/jopart/muv004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., & Harris, D. (1993). Flexibility in long-term contractual relationships: The role of co-operation. Journal of Law and Society, 20(2), 166–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, K., & Woodward, D. (2005). Political issues of public-private partnerships. In G. A. Hodge & C. Greve (Eds.), The challenge of public-private partnerships: Learning from international experience (pp. 81–94). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, P. J. (2003). Governing by contract: Challenges and opportunities for public managers. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries, P., & Yehoue, E. B. (Eds.). (2013). The Routledge companion to public-private partnerships. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y. L. (1996). The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal, 17(7), 55–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • EPEC (2014). Market update: review of the European PPP market. First half of 2014. Luxembourg: European PPP Expertise Centre.

  • Faems, D., Janssens, M., Madhok, A., & Van Looy, B. (2008). Toward an integrative perspective on alliance governance: Connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract application. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1053–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flemish Parliament (2011). 52 (2011-2012), nr. 1.

  • Flemish Parliament (2013). 52 (2013-2014), nr. 1.

  • Flemish Parliament (2015). 52 (2014-2015), nr. 1.

  • Flinders, M. (2005). The politics of public-private partnerships. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 7(2), 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimsey, D., & Lewis, M. K. (Eds.). (2004). The economics of public private partnerships. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann, A., Davies, A., & Frederiksen, L. (2010). Learning to deliver service-enhanced public infrastructure: balancing contractual and relational capabilities. Construction Management and Economics, 28(11), 1165–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann, A., & Dorée, A. (2015). Learning between projects: More than sending messages in bottles. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 341–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HM Treasury. (2007). Standardisation of PFI contracts. Version 4. London: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Treasury. (2012). Standardisation of PF2 contracts. London: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, G. A., & Greve, C. (2010). Public-private partnerships: Governance scheme or language game? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69(1), S8–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, G. A., Greve, C., & Boardman, A. E. (Eds.). (2010). International handbook on public-private partnerships. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iossa, E., Spagnolo, G., & Vellez, M. (2007). Contract design in public-private partnerships. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joaquin, M. E., & Greitens, T. J. (2012). Contract management capacity breakdown? An analysis of U.S. local governments. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 807–816.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. W., & Brown, T. L. (2012). The importance of contract design. Public Administration Review, 72(5), 687–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumineau, F., Fréchet, M., & Puthod, D. (2011). An organizational learning perspective on the contracting process. Strategic Organization, 9(1), 8–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y. (2002). Contract, cooperation, and performance in international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 23(10), 903–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macneil, I. R. (1980). The new social contract: An inquiry into modern contractual relations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, K. J., & Argyres, N. (2004). Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal computer industry. Organization Science, 15(4), 394–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1996). A preliminary typology of organizational learning: Synthesizing the literature. Journal of Management, 22(3), 485–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkhe, A. (1993). Strategic alliances structuring: A game theoretic and transaction cost examination of interfirm cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), 794–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petsoulas, C., Allen, P., Hughes, D., Vincent-Jones, P., & Roberts, J. (2011). The use of standard contracts in the English National Health Service: A case study analysis. Social Science and Medicine, 73(2), 185–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, M. (2005). Learning from UK Private Finance Initiative experience. In G. A. Hodge & C. Greve (Eds.), The challenge of public-private partnerships: Learning from international experience (pp. 207–230). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 707–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rijkswaterstaat. (2012). Rijksbrede Modelovereenkomst DBFM Huisvesting. The Hague: Rijkswaterstaat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ring, P. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1992). Structuring cooperative relationships between organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 13(7), 483–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryall, M. D., & Sampson, R. C. (2009). Formal contracts in the presence of relational enforcement mechanisms: Evidence from technology development projects. Management Science, 55(6), 906–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schepker, D. J., Oh, W.-Y., Martynov, A., & Poppo, L. (2014). The many futures of contracts: Moving beyond structure and safeguarding to coordination and adaptation. Journal of Management, 40(1), 193–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, S., & Berg, M. (1997). Standardization in action: Achieving local universality through medical protocols. Social Studies of Science, 27(2), 273–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, M. I. (2008). Forging glocal governance? Urban infrastructures as networked financial products. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hurk, M., & Verhoest, K. (2016). The challenge of using standard contracts in public-private partnerships. Public Management Review, 18(2), 278–299. doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.984623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Veen, M., & Korthals Altes, W. K. (2012). Contracts and learning in complex urban projects. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(5), 1053–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanneste, B. S., & Puranam, P. (2010). Repeated interactions and contractual detail: Identifying the learning effect. Organization Science, 21(1), 186–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincent-Jones, P. (1994). The limits of contractual order in public sector transacting. Legal Studies, 14(3), 364–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincent-Jones, P. (2006). The new public contracting: Regulation, responsiveness, relationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. The Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C., Sturdy, A., & Wylie, N. (2012). Management innovation through standardization: Consultants as standardizers of organizational practice. Research Policy, 41(3), 652–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yescombe, E. R. (2007). Public-private partnerships: Principles of policy and finance. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Antwerp, Sint-Jacobstraat 2, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium

    Martijn van den Hurk

Authors
  1. Martijn van den Hurk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martijn van den Hurk.

Appendix: list of interviews

Appendix: list of interviews

  1. 1.

    Respondent A: Project director at DBM partner, January 7, 2015.

  2. 2.

    Respondent B: Director project finance at F partner, January 12, 2015.

  3. 3.

    Respondent C: Project director at DBM partner, January 16, 2015.

  4. 4.

    Respondent D: Project director at DBM partner, January 16, 2015.

  5. 5.

    Respondents E–F: Investment managers at Via-Invest, January 19, 2015.

  6. 6.

    Respondent G: Project manager at AWV, January 21, 2015.

  7. 7.

    Respondent H: Associate partner at law firm, January 21, 2015.

  8. 8.

    Respondent I: Project manager at AWV, January 22, 2015.

  9. 9.

    Respondent J: Project manager at AWV, January 26, 2015.

  10. 10.

    Respondent K: Director at F partner, January 27, 2015.

  11. 11.

    Respondent L: Investment director at F partner, January 29, 2015.

  12. 12.

    Respondent M: Legal counsel at law firm, February 4, 2015.

  13. 13.

    Respondent N: Project manager at AWV, February 6, 2015.

  14. 14.

    Respondent O: Advisor at Flemish PPP Knowledge Centre, February 10, 2015.

  15. 15.

    Respondent P: Project director at DBFM partner, February 16, 2015.

  16. 16.

    Respondent Q: SPV manager, March 2, 2015.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van den Hurk, M. Learning to contract in public–private partnerships for road infrastructure: recent experiences in Belgium. Policy Sci 49, 309–333 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9240-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9240-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation