Competitive neutrality in public-private partnership evaluations: a non-neutral interpretation in comparative perspective (Record no. 116870)

000 -LEADER
fixed length control field 01950pab a2200181 454500
008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION
fixed length control field 180718b2017 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Zwalf, Sebastian
245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT
Title Competitive neutrality in public-private partnership evaluations: a non-neutral interpretation in comparative perspective
260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC.
Date of publication, distribution, etc. 2017
300 ## - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
Extent p.225-237.
362 ## - DATES OF PUBLICATION AND/OR SEQUENTIAL DESIGNATION
Dates of publication and/or sequential designation Dec
520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC.
Summary, etc. Internationally, public-private partnerships (PPPs) have become an increasingly common part of government infrastructure programmes. The public sector comparator (PSC) is the key quantitative test to ensure that PPP projects achieve much vaunted value-for-money (VFM) compared to projects managed solely by governments. Despite attracting much debate over the preceding two decades, one component of the PSC that has received relatively little attention is that of competitive neutrality, which is the requirement to remove any advantages either delivery method, private or public, may have due to ownership. Competitive neutrality policies have found favour over the last two decades in an effort to enhance micro-economic competitive tension. In response, this article reviews the conceptual basis for competitive neutrality and considers how it has been applied within the PPP guidelines in eight G20 economies. It finds that, while most governments apply some principles of competitive neutrality, the application varies widely, with a tendency to favour the PPP option. It also finds that the objectives of VFM and competitive neutrality are competing and, in fact, contradictory, which raises the issue of whether a competitive neutrality adjustment should be made to all PPP evaluations. The conclusion is that such an adjustment should not be made in all instances. - Reproduced.
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element G20 economies
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element Competitive neutrality
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element Public private partnership
773 ## - HOST ITEM ENTRY
Main entry heading Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration
909 ## -
-- 116876
Holdings
Withdrawn status Lost status Damaged status Not for loan Permanent Location Current Location Date acquired Serial Enumeration / chronology Barcode Date last seen Price effective from Koha item type
        Indian Institute of Public Administration Indian Institute of Public Administration 2018-07-19 Volume no: 39, Issue no: 4 AR117336 2018-07-19 2018-07-19 Articles

Powered by Koha