This IMF note, discusses what finance ministries can do to ensure that public-private partnerships (PPPs) are used wisely. By inviting private participation in infrastructure development and service provision, PPPs can help improve public services. Yet, strong governance institutions are needed to manage risks and avoid unexpected costs from PPPs. While in the short term, PPPs may appear cheaper than traditional public investment, over time they can turn out to be more expensive and undermine fiscal sustainability, particularly when governments ignore or are unaware of their deferred costs and associated fiscal risks.
- Tax Justice (tax)
- Sustainable Development Goals
- Working conditions
- Gender equality
- Financing for Development
- International Financial Institutions
- Climate Change
- Trans-Pacific Partnership
- Trade Union Rights (TUR)
- Trade in Services Agreement
- Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
- Free Trade Agreements
No tags to show
No tags to show
No tags to show
No tags to show
Explore POP by , , , , and
No results found.
This PSIRU report, commissioned by EPSU, highlights the many failures of liberalisation – prices have increased for consumers by as much as double in the past 10 years, a quarter of jobs have been lost in the energy sector, and public monopolies have been replaced by powerful private cartels – and also offers alternatives for the future.
The Special Rapporteur examines public-private partnerships in education, which are inextricably linked to rapidly expanding privatization. He highlights their implications for the right to education and for the principles of social justice and equity. Lastly, he offers a set of recommendations with a view to developing an effective regulatory framework, along with implementation strategies for public-private partnerships in education, in keeping with State obligations for the right to education, as laid down in international human rights conventions, and the need to safeguard education as a public good.
Conflict of interest: how corporations that profit from privatisation are helping write UN standards on PPPs Briefing by Public Services International to UNECE Working Party on PPPs
The UNECE Working Party on PPPs is attempting to create guiding principles and international standards on PPPs. With this in mind, the UNECE established a Roster of PPP Experts, “open to PPP practitioners with relevant experience in delivering PPP programmes” 5 to serve as advisors and enablers for the process. An analysis of this Roster conducted by PSI found that 190 of the 360 “Experts” named on the roster, come from the private sector; civil society representation is virtually non-existent; workers and unions, who have first hand experience in dealing with PPPs and face the consequence of failures, are entirely missing from the list of experts and advisory functions...PSI also presented a series of brief case studies on the practices of companies represented on the UNECE Roster of PPP Experts and Business Advisory Board, examining their past involvement in PPPs and analysing aspects of their financial practices.
This report published by the New Local Government Network (NLGN) is a new voice to the debate on the role of the private sector in the delivery of public services. While the current debate remains unhelpfully polarised along party lines, we argue that partnerships between the public and private sectors must fundamentally change – from an approach that is primarily transactional in nature, to one that is changemaking.
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are increasingly being promoted as the solution to the shortfall in financing needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Economic infrastructure, such as railways, roads, airports and ports, but also key services such as health, education, water and electricity are being delivered through PPPs in both the global north and south. This report gives an in-depth, evidence-based analysis of the impact of 10 PPP projects that have taken place across four continents, in both developed and developing countries. These case studies build on research conducted by civil society experts in recent years and have been written by the people who often work with and around the communities affected by these projects.
New report on "Extreme poverty and Human rights" finds that "widespread privatisation of public goods in many societies is systematically eliminating human rights protections and further marginalising those living in poverty".
Tom Groenfeldt, FORBES. Public Private Partnerships, (PPPs), which are a controversial source of funding for government projects, are back at the current World Bank IMF meetings in Washington, under a new name — Blended Finance. Proponents say that blended finance is a way to fund the $2.5 trillion a year needed to “support progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set forth by the United Nations." While the name is new, the concept of joint funding isn't. Wikipedia says that “The concept of blended finance was first recognized as a solution to the funding gap in the outcome document of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development in July 2015.”
The European Court of Auditors (ECA’s) special reports set out the results of its audits of EU policies and programmes, or of management-related topics from specific budgetary areas. The ECA selects and designs these audit tasks to be of maximum impact by considering the risks to performance or compliance, the level of income or spending involved, forthcoming developments and political and public interest. Speaking ahead of the ECA’s report release, PSI Deputy General Secretary, David Boys said: “For decades trade unions, civil society groups and the wider public fought against the failed privatisation agenda. Now that the EU’s very own financial watchdog is clearly saying PPPs are a bad idea, it’s surely time for leaders to take note.”
EU Public Private Partnerships suffer from widespread shortcomings and limited benefits, say Auditors.
“EU co-financed Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) cannot be regarded as an economically viable option for delivering public infrastructure,” reads the opening line of the ECA’s press release, calling into question the EU’s long-entrenched promotion of the controversial funding mechanism.