Advertisement

The Model of Assessing the Innovativeness of Public Entities Obliged to Carry Out Public–Private Partnership Projects

  • Arkadiusz BorowiecEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics book series (EBES, volume 10/2)

Abstract

Public–Private Partnership (PPP) is one of the innovative economic instruments allowing for the acceleration of development and investment, especially during economic downturn. Literature studies show a paucity of items related to the issues of improving the innovativeness with the use of PPP. While recognizing this gap the article attempts to build a model to assess the innovativeness of public entities obliged to initiate and implement PPP projects. Network thinking methodology has been used to build the model. As a result, after the identification of factors affecting the innovativeness of PPP projects, a network of links has been established between them and examined in terms of type and intensity of exposure. Building a model according to the methodology involved using the opinions of experts along with long-term suggestions and opinions conducted in the course of participation in all kinds of conferences and trainings. The model was also subjected to validation by two selected entities. Results obtained from the use of the model are confirmed by low innovativeness of public entities obliged to carry out PPP projects. The model itself can promote entities that contribute to the formation of innovativeness and results in their fairer assessment.

Keywords

Macroeconomic policy Policy making Innovations Public–private partnership 

References

  1. Almarri, K., & Boussabaine, H. (2017). The influence of critical success factors on value for money viability analysis in public–private partnership projects. Project Management Journal, 48(4), 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Audretsch, D. B. (1995). The propensity to exit and innovation. Review of Industrial Organization, 10(5), 589–605.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0102688. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borowiec, A. (2012). Perspectives for the application of public-private partnerships in the SME sector in the light of empirical research. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, 696, 30–39.Google Scholar
  4. Borowiec, A. (2015). A model assessing innovativeness of administration units awarding public contracts as a tool to conduct economic policy of the state. Equilibrium, 10(2), 93–114.  https://doi.org/10.12775/EQUIL.2015.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gajewska-Jedwabny, A. (2007). Institutional support for the development of PPP in the word. Gazeta Samorządu i Administracji, No. 15/16 (241/242).Google Scholar
  6. Koschatzky, K. (2017). A theoretical view on public-private partnerships in research and innovation in Germany. Working Papers Firms and Region, No. R2/2017.Google Scholar
  7. Malerba, F., & Orsenigo, L. (1996). Schumpeterian patterns of innovation are technology-specific. Research Policy, 25(3), 451–478.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(95)00840-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Niedzielski, P., & Rychlik, K. (2006). Innovation and creativity. Szczecin: Uniwersytet Szczeciński.Google Scholar
  9. OECD. (2005). Oslo manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. Paris: Organisation for Economics Cooperation and Development, Statistical Office of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  10. Oppenländer, K. H. (2000). Empirische Wirtschaftsforschung als Grunlage für unternehmerisches und wirtschaftspolitisches Handeln [Empirical economic research as a basis for entrepreneurial and economic policy action]. Berlin: Duncker und Humbolt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Piekarczyk, A., & Zimniewicz, K. (2010). Network thinking in theory and practice. Warszawa: PWE.Google Scholar
  12. Probst, G., & Gomez, P. (1989). Vernetztes Denken, Unternehmen ganzheitlichen führen [Connected thinking, company holistic lead]. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  13. Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and economic growth. Cambridge: CUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schumpeter, J. (1960). Economic development theory. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
  15. Simpson, P. M., Siguaw, J. A., & Enz, C. A. (2006). Innovation orientation outcomes: The good and the bad. Journal of Business Research, 59(10–11), 1133–1141.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Starzyńska, W. (2011). Innovation and public procurement system in the opinion of contracting entities. In J. Niczyporuk, J. Sadowy, & M. Urbanek (Eds.), New approach to public procurement – public procurement as an instrument for enhancing the economy’s innovation and sustainability. Polish and foreign experiences (pp. 183–191). Warszawa: Urząd Zamówień Publicznych.Google Scholar
  17. Tkacheva, T., & Afanasjefa, L. (2017). Public-private partnership as an encouragement tool of innovative development. Journal of Applied Engineering Science, 15(3), 242–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering ManagementPoznan University of TechnologyPoznanPoland

Personalised recommendations