Who to blame

An inquiry into universal factors accounting for output variations in public–private partnership initiatives across geographical locations. Who to be blamed for not meeting performance, innovativeness, and quality outputs

Bibliographic Data

ID12705430
AuthorsAlexander Narh Tetteh (0000-0002-8378-4984, School of Public Affairs University of Science and Technology of China Hefei China, corresponding author), Emmanuel Tetteh Teye (0000-0002-2643-1891, School of Public Affairs University of Science and Technology of China Hefei China), Beatrice Ayerakwa Abosi (School of Public Affairs University of Science and Technology of China Hefei China), Chong Ren (0000-0001-7244-0759, University of Science and Technology of China), Ren Chong (School of Public Affairs University of Science and Technology of China Hefei China)
Year2019
Volume19
Issue2
Publication date2019-04-04
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Public Affairs (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1472-3891 • E-ISSN: 1479-1854
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/pa.1918
OpenAlexW2926944782
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited58

With the current controversy and blame game on output of public–private partnership (PPP) initiatives concerns, we investigate why there may be variations in achieving innovativeness, perceived quality, and performance of PPP initiatives across different geographical locations. For instance, we investigate a scenario where “a private company involved in waste management will perform in country ‘A’ but fails to perform in country ‘B’ given the same assignment and target.” We empirically sampled and make conclusions with 475 respondents from the public sector, private sector, and academia based on a survey inquiry. We adopted the structural equation modeling method using the partial least square for the data analysis. The results show that environmental dynamism causes major variations in desired output of PPP initiatives followed by collaboration capacity, environmental fit, and absorptive capacity, respectively. The findings further show that one partner cannot be blamed entirely for causing the failure of PPP initiative. However, we conclude that because on the basis of our data, environmental dynamism, which is as a result of some governmental activities, depicts the highest effect on output, public partners might be more liable. The findings from this study are an explicit view of PPP technocrats, which makes the conclusions more reliable

Blame · Business · Dynamism · Economic growth · Economics · Economy · General partnership · Political science · Politics · Private sector · Public economics · Public sector · Public–private partnership · Quality (philosophy · Technocracy · Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth · Psychology · Public Procurement and Policy · Public-Private Partnership Projects · Finance

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub