The Analysis of Value-for-Money (VfM) for Public Private Partnership Infrastructure: A Public Sector Comparator Approach

Main Article Content

Nuanan Kurakaew
Nakhon Kokkaew
Nukul Suksuwan

Abstract

Countries around the world have welcomed Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) as an alternative to finance infrastructure. The Thai government is also increasingly aware of the importance of infrastructure and the need to tap private resources to help finance strategic infrastructure projects. However, in choosing PPP schemes over traditional project procurement, it should be more about efficiency and value for money (VfM) in delivery of the project rather than the reason of fiscal constraints. Accordingly, the detailed, quantitative analysis of the value for money of PPP projects is vital for the success of the projects from the public sector’s point of view. One of several methods used by many governments in determining whether the private proposals offer better VfM to the public sector is a Public Sector Comparator (PSC). Essentially, the PSC estimates the hypothetical risk-adjusted cost if a project were to be financed, owned and implemented by government. In Thailand, as the new PPP law was signed into law in 2013, it is required by law for the responsible agency to compare the public’s total cost between traditional public procurement and PPP models, but, as to how the cost of the project will be compared, there is no definitive guideline on this. Therefore, this paper is to study how the PSC can be used for the evaluation of PPP infrastructure projects in Thailand. The main processes of the PSC will be reviewed, drawing from international experience. Example of how the PSC can be applied in real practice will also be presented. The results of the study showed that PPP project involved higher project life cycle cost to the government. However, in terms of risk, PPP project helped substantially minimized the cost risk.

Article Details

How to Cite
Kurakaew, N., Kokkaew, N., & Suksuwan, N. (2016). The Analysis of Value-for-Money (VfM) for Public Private Partnership Infrastructure: A Public Sector Comparator Approach. WMS Journal of Management, 5(1), 26–39. Retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/wms/article/view/47200
Section
Research Articles-Academic Articles
Author Biographies

Nuanan Kurakaew

School of Engineering and Resources, Walailak University

Nakhon Kokkaew

School of Engineering and Resources, Walailak University

Nukul Suksuwan

School of Engineering and Resources, Walailak University

References

คงขวัญ ศิลา. (2553). ความร่วมมือภาครัฐ-ภาคเอกชน (Public Private Partnership: PPP). สืบค้นเมื่อ, 18 เมษายน 2558 สืบค้นจาก,http://www.fpo.go.th/FPO/index2.php?mod=Content&file=contentview&contentID=CNT0006003&categoryID=CAT0000146

ประกาศคณะกรรมการนโยบายการให้เอกชนร่วมลงทุนในกิจการของรัฐ. หลักเกณฑ์และวิธีการคำนวณมูลค่าของโครงการการลงทุนในกิจการของรัฐ พ.ศ. 2558. (2558).

สำนักกฎหมายธรรมนิติ http://www.dlo.co.th/node/681

Bain, R. (2010). Public sector comparators for UK PFI roads: inside the black box. Transportation, 37(3), 447-471.

Chiara, N., & Garvin, M. (2008). Variance models for project financial risk analysis with applications to greenfield BOT highway projects. Construction Management and Economics, 26 (9,2008), 925-939.

Cruz, C., & Marques, R. (2013). Public Sector Comparator Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships, (pp. 21-51): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Esty, B., Narasimhan, B., & Tufano, P. (1999). Interest-rate exposure and bank mergers. Journal of Banking & Finance, 23(2–4), 255-285.

Ezzell, J. R., & Miles, J. A. (1983). Analyzing leases with the after-tax cost of debt. Journal of Business Research, 11(4), 489-499.

Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. S., & Buhl, S. (2003). How common and how large are cost overruns in transport infrastructure projects?.Transport Reviews, 23(1), 71-88.

Grimsey, D., & Lewis, M. K. (2002). Evaluating the risks of public private partnerships for infrastructure projects. International. Journal of Project Management, 20(2), 107-118.

Grimsey, D., & Lewis, M. K. (2005). Are Public Private Partnerships value for money?: Evaluating alternative approaches and comparing academic and practitioner views. Accounting Forum, 29(4), 345-378.

Heald, D. (2003). Value for money tests and accounting treatment in PFI schemes. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16(3), 342-371.

Hodge, G. A., & Greve, C. (2007). Public–Private Partnerships: An International Performance Review. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 545-558.

Khadaroo, I. (2008). The actual evaluation of school PFI bids for value for money in the UK public sector. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 19(8), 1321-1345.

Quiggin, J. (2004). RISK, PPPs AND THE PUBLIC SECTOR COMPARATOR. Australian Accounting Review, 14(2), 51-61.

Ogunlana, S. (2003). Profitable Partnering in Construction Procurement: Taylor & Francis.

Osei-Kyei, R., & Chan, A. P. C. (2015). Review of studies on the Critical Success Factors for Public–Private Partnership (PPP) projects from 1990 to 2013. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), 1335-1346.

Roehrich, J. K., Lewis, M. A., & George, G. (2014). Are public–private partnerships a healthy option? A systematic literature review. Social Science & Medicine, 113(0), 110-119.

Sarmento, J. M. (2010). Do Public-Private Partnerships Create Value for Money for the Public Sector? The Portuguese Experience. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 10(1), 93-119.

Sun, H., Zhou, Y., & Fan, Z.-Q. (2010, 9-10 Jan. 2010). Value for money test in infrastructure procurement. Paper presented at the Logistics Systems and Intelligent Management, 2010 International Conference on.

Vose, D. (2008). Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide: Wiley.

Williamson, P. J. (2010). Cost Innovation: Preparing for a ‘Value-for-Money’ Revolution. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 343-353.