IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/pubmgr/v18y2016i2p199-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

(De)Politicization Dynamics in Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Lessons from a comparison between UK and Flemish PPP policy

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Willems
  • Wouter Van Dooren

Abstract

This article analyses the (de)politicization dynamics in complex and technical matters like public-private partnerships, which is necessary given its social impact and budgetary consequences for the years and generations to come. The global financial crisis provides an excellent window of opportunity to present this argument, because PPP policy needs to reinvent itself. We argue that PPP policy needs to be (re)politicized at the broader societal and discursive levels, which means that their public nature is recognized and that policy alternatives are debated in the public forums. The 'Private Finance Initiative' reassessment process in the UK may serve as an example.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Willems & Wouter Van Dooren, 2016. "(De)Politicization Dynamics in Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Lessons from a comparison between UK and Flemish PPP policy," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 199-220, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:pubmgr:v:18:y:2016:i:2:p:199-220
    DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2014.969759
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14719037.2014.969759
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14719037.2014.969759?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Chris Foye, 2022. "Section 106, Viability, And The Depoliticization Of English Land Value Capture Policy," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 269-286, March.
    2. Starominski-Uehara, Marvin, 2020. "Governance in Crisis: Institutionalizing Reflective Report to Guide Decision Making Under Uncertainty," SocArXiv y3nsa, Center for Open Science.
    3. Wang, Nannan & Gong, Zheng & Liu, Yunfei & Thomson, Craig, 2020. "The influence of governance on the implementation of Public-Private Partnerships in the United Kingdom and China: A systematic comparison," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    4. Laura Deruytter & Ben Derudder, 2019. "Keeping financialisation under the radar: Brussels Airport, Macquarie Bank and the Belgian politics of privatised infrastructure," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(7), pages 1347-1367, May.
    5. Zhe Cheng & Zhenshan Yang & Huina Gao & Hui Tao & Ming Xu, 2018. "Does PPP Matter to Sustainable Tourism Development? An Analysis of the Spatial Effect of the Tourism PPP Policy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-15, November.
    6. Martijn van den Hurk & Marlies Hueskes, 2017. "Beyond the financial logic: Realizing valuable outcomes in public–private partnerships in Flanders and Ontario," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(5), pages 784-808, August.
    7. van den Hurk, Martijn & Verhoest, Koen, 2017. "On the fast track? Using standard contracts in public–private partnerships for sports facilities: A case study," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 226-239.
    8. Dónal Palcic & Eoin Reeves & Anne Stafford, 2018. "Lifting the Lid: the Private Financing of Motorway PPPs in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 49(2), pages 217-239.
    9. Yubo Guo & Igor Martek & Chuan Chen, 2019. "Policy Evolution in the Chinese PPP Market: The Shifting Strategies of Governmental Support Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:pubmgr:v:18:y:2016:i:2:p:199-220. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPXM20 .

    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.