IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Some Theory, Some Ideology and Lots of Pragmatism in the Cost-Benefit Analysis of PPPs

  • Antonio Estache

This paper reviews the theoretical debates on the extent to which PPP demands changes in how cost-benefit analysis needs to be conducted for public projects. It presents first a simple conceptual discussion which shows that the comparison between PPP and public procurement boils down to: (i) the difference between the discount rate and the total cost difference between the best PPP bid and the best public sector option (including in the cost difference the allocation of operational risks and the likelihood of these risks). It then looks at international practice and shows that pragmatism, and sometimes ideology, dominates theory in the use of cost benefit analysis to compare the two forms of provision.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/126487/5/2012-027-ESTACHE-sometheory.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series Working Papers ECARES with number ECARES 2012-027.

as
in new window

Length: 21 p.
Date of creation: Aug 2012
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published by:
Handle: RePEc:eca:wpaper:2013/126487
Contact details of provider: Postal: Av. F.D., Roosevelt, 39, 1050 Bruxelles
Phone: (32 2) 650 30 75
Fax: (32 2) 650 44 75
Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eca:wpaper:2013/126487. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Benoit Pauwels)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.