Monday, April 16, 2012

Keeping P3's in Perspective

Lots of people have much invested in the growth of P3 projects.   Politicians, think tanks, law-firms, consultants,  bankers, as well as connected contractors with experience and ability to carry-out these projects sing its praises--often uncritically.  The promise of lower delivery costs surely serves everybody, but only if the promises become reality. 

In the U.S. P3 is gaining momentum in part on the perceived successes in Europe, Canada, and Australia.   What has been the experience of actual projects in these locations?  It is always useful to be reminded that there are trade-offs between different delivery systems.   Here is a cautionary list of 100 projects assemled in 2005 by the Ontario Health Coalition.  The individual descriptions for these "flawed, failed, and abandoned" projects is too short and cursory to be very helpful, but surely it is useful to keep in mind that no one delivery system assures success in every case.    [Hat tip to Roger Haerr and Paul Bruno in their recent article in the Construction Lawyer on mechanics liens in the P3 context]

In the meantime, the Brookings-Rockefeller Institute has a December 2011 report which has the latest statiscs on P3's in the United States.  They recommend that state legislatures establish dedicated P3 units to tackle bottlenecks in the P3 process and protect the public interest, pass legislation to assure a transparent and outcome based project selection process, and cooperate with the federal government to address any technical assistance gaps for P3's on an as needed basis.

No comments:

Post a Comment