IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v79y2022ics0038012121000951.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preference heterogeneity of local government for implementing ICT infrastructure and services through public-private partnership mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Acharya, Bikram
  • Lee, Jongsu
  • Moon, HyungBin

Abstract

The government addresses the demand for information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure based on strategic economic planning. However, financial resources, as well as government inefficiencies handling the public infrastructure are the most prominent constraints hindering the development of infrastructure. In such a case, incorporating the private sector would strengthen the government strategy to implement the public ICT infrastructure. This study analyses the government perception to implement the public ICT infrastructure incorporating the private sector and finds strong heterogeneity to implement the public ICT infrastructure through public-private partnership (PPP) mechanisms. The main results are that the government agencies (decision makers) in Nepal positively prefer foreign companies and tend to share financial risks with the private sector in implementing ICT projects through PPP. However, there is relatively high heterogeneity in preferences of the government agencies for these attributes. The results of this study imply that public and private sectors might exhibit opportunistic behavior from the development to the operation of the project, ultimately risking the successful outcome of the project.

Suggested Citation

  • Acharya, Bikram & Lee, Jongsu & Moon, HyungBin, 2022. "Preference heterogeneity of local government for implementing ICT infrastructure and services through public-private partnership mechanism," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:79:y:2022:i:c:s0038012121000951
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2021.101103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012121000951
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2021.101103?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Shuai & Cai, Hubo, 2017. "Government incentive impacts on private investment behaviors under demand uncertainty," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 115-129.
    2. David A. Hensher & Stewart Jones, 2007. "Forecasting Corporate Bankruptcy: Optimizing the Performance of the Mixed Logit Model," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 43(3), pages 241-264, September.
    3. Alain Bonnafous & Pablo Jensen, 2005. "Ranking Transport Projects by their Socioeconomic Value or Financial Interest rate of return?," Post-Print halshs-00079721, HAL.
    4. Yeonbae Kim & Jeong-Dong Lee & Daeyoung Koh, 2005. "Effects of consumer preferences on the convergence of mobile telecommunications devices," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 817-826.
    5. Nunzia Carbonara & Nicola Costantino & Roberta Pellegrino, 2014. "Revenue guarantee in public-private partnerships: a fair risk allocation model," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 403-415, April.
    6. Koo, Yoonmo & Kim, Chang Seob & Hong, Junhee & Choi, Ie-Jung & Lee, Jongsu, 2012. "Consumer preferences for automobile energy-efficiency grades," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 446-451.
    7. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    8. W. R. Gilks & N. G. Best & K. K. C. Tan, 1995. "Adaptive Rejection Metropolis Sampling Within Gibbs Sampling," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 44(4), pages 455-472, December.
    9. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    10. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    11. Meghana Ayyagari & Asli Demirgüç-Kunt & Vojislav Maksimovic, 2008. "How Important Are Financing Constraints? The Role of Finance in the Business Environment," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 22(3), pages 483-516, November.
    12. Lee, Jongsu & Kim, Yeonbae & Lee, Jeong-Dong & Park, Yuri, 2006. "Estimating the extent of potential competition in the Korean mobile telecommunications market: Switching costs and number portability," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 107-124, January.
    13. Shin, Jungwoo & Woo, JongRoul & Huh, Sung-Yoon & Lee, Jongsu & Jeong, Gicheol, 2014. "Analyzing public preferences and increasing acceptability for the Renewable Portfolio Standard in Korea," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 17-26.
    14. Demi Chung & David A. Hensher, 2015. "Modelling Risk Perceptions of Stakeholders in Public–Private Partnership Toll Road Contracts," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 51(3), pages 437-483, September.
    15. Bonnafous, Alain & Jensen, Pablo, 2005. "Ranking transport projects by their socioeconomic value or financial internal rate of return?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 131-136, March.
    16. Mr. Etienne B Yehoue & Miss Mona Hammami & Jean-François Ruhashyankiko, 2006. "Determinants of Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure," IMF Working Papers 2006/099, International Monetary Fund.
    17. Sadowski, Bert M. & Nucciarelli, Alberto & de Rooij, Marc, 0. "Providing incentives for private investment in municipal broadband networks: Evidence from the Netherlands," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10-11), pages 582-595, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cao, Fuguo & Li, Runyu & Guo, Shaobo, 2024. "Rhetoric and reality of public-private partnerships in China: A sustainable public procurement perspective," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Darko, Deborah & Zhu, Demi & Quayson, Matthew & Hossin, Md Altab & Omoruyi, Osayuwamen & Bediako, Albert Kweku, 2023. "A multicriteria decision framework for governance of PPP projects towards sustainable development," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    3. Jiang, Ke & Zhang, Jiaming & Zhang, Leilei & Wang, Die & Wang, Yusheng, 2023. "Sustainable cooperation in the watershed ecological compensation public-private partnership project: Lessons from China's Chishui river basin," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    2. von Haefen, Roger H. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2003. "Not Playing The Game: Non-Particpation In Repeated Discrete Choice Models," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22037, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    4. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    5. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:30:y:2010:i:1:p:437-449 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    7. Davis, Katrina J & Burton, Michael & Kragt, Marit E, 2016. "Discrete choice models: scale heterogeneity and why it matters," Working Papers 235373, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    8. Ho Seoung Na & Junseok Hwang & Hongbum Kim, 2023. "Which Attributes Should be Considered in Regulating the Internet of Things? Evidence From Conjoint Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    9. Benoit Chèze & Charles Collet & Anthony Paris, 2021. "Estimating discrete choice experiments : theoretical fundamentals," CIRED Working Papers hal-03262187, HAL.
    10. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    11. Huh, Sung-Yoon & Woo, JongRoul & Lim, Sesil & Lee, Yong-Gil & Kim, Chang Seob, 2015. "What do customers want from improved residential electricity services? Evidence from a choice experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 410-420.
    12. Immerzeel, Bart & Vermaat, Jan E. & Juutinen, Artti & Pouta, Eija & Artell, Janne, 2022. "Appreciation of Nordic landscapes and how the bioeconomy might change that: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    13. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2014. "Putting One's Money Where One's Mouth is: Increasing Saliency in the Field," Monash Economics Working Papers 43-14, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    14. Confraria, João & Ribeiro, Tiago & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2017. "Analysis of consumer preferences for mobile telecom plans using a discrete choice experiment," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 157-169.
    15. Nordén, Anna & Coria, Jessica & Jönsson, Anna Maria & Lagergren, Fredrik & Lehsten, Veiko, 2017. "Divergence in stakeholders' preferences: Evidence from a choice experiment on forest landscapes preferences in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 179-195.
    16. Probst, Lorenz & Houedjofonon, Elysée & Ayerakwa, Hayford Mensah & Haas, Rainer, 2012. "Will they buy it? The potential for marketing organic vegetables in the food vending sector to strengthen vegetable safety: A choice experiment study in three West African cities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 296-308.
    17. Hoyos Ramos, David, 2010. "Using discrete choice experiments for environmental valuation," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    18. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    19. Park, Yuri & Koo, Yoonmo, 2016. "An empirical analysis of switching cost in the smartphone market in South Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 307-318.
    20. Sato, Masayuki & Aoshima, Ippei & Chang, Youngho, 2021. "Connectedness to nature and the conservation of the urban ecosystem: Perspectives from the valuation of urban forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    21. Christos Makriyannis & Robert J. Johnston & Ewa Zawojska, 2022. "Do numerical probabilities promote informed stated preference responses under inherent uncertainty? Insight from a coastal adaptation choice experiment," Working Papers 2022-05, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:79:y:2022:i:c:s0038012121000951. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/seps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.