Date post: | 01-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | frederick-atkinson |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Public-Private Partnerships,Neo-Liberal Globalization, and
Democracy
Gulf Comparative Education Society ConferenceRas Al Khaimah, UAE
16-17 March 2011
Mark GinsburgAcademy for Educational Development
& University of Maryland
Introduction
PPP concept not new; implemented since 18th century
However, since 1990s, PPPs have become popular model for:– Local/national governments– International development agencies– World Economic Forum: “so that many necessary
advances can be achieved … for the benefit of all”
Conceptualizing PPPs
“few people agree on what a PPP actually is” (Hodge & Greve (2007, p. 545)
“discussions of PPPs often use terminology ambiguously, or loosely defined” (Miraftab, 2004, p. 92)
Issues to clarify:– Who are the (public & private) partners?– What roles do partners play?
Types & Levels of Partnering Organizations
Type of Organization/ Level of Organization
Local National International
Public (government)
Private (for-profit)
Private (nonprofit)
Partner Roles in PPPs
Type of Involvement/Level of Involvement None Low Medium High
Financial Resources
Contributor
Recipient
Human Resources
Management Expertise
Technical Expertise
Decision-Making Authority
Goals
Strategies
Budget
Personnel
Evaluation
The Whole World’s A Stagefor Public-Private Partnerships: But What is the “Plot” of the Play?But What is the “Plot” of the Play?
MultilateralOrganizations
National Governments
BilateralOrganizations
International NGOs
MultinationalCorporations
National NGOs
Local NGOsNationalCorporations
Local Governments
LocalCorporations
School/University Institutions
Neoliberal Version of Globalization
Dimensions of globalization– Political– Technological– Cultural– Economic
Neoliberalism: less government, more private sector for “increased efficiency” in production and service delivery
PPPs and Neoliberal Globalization (1)
PPPs “should not be confused with either privatization or with outsourcing” (Davies and Hentschke, 2006, p. 206)
– Some PPPs funded by corporations or NGOs PPPs “are a means of utilizing public sector resources in
… a blend of outsourcing and privatization” (National Council for Public-Private Partnerships, 2002, p. 4)
– PPPs serve as a “Trojan horse” for privatizing government responsibilities (Miraftab, 2004, p. 89)
– “the language of PPPs is a game to ‘cloud’ over other strategies … [e.g.,] privatization” (Hodge and Greve, 2007, p. 547)
– “the construct partnership … [is] a euphemism for privatizing the functions of government without assailing its legitimacy” (Linder, 1999, p. 41)
PPPs and Neoliberal Globalization (2)
Neoliberalism downsizing government revenues search for more “efficient” modes of service delivery– In U.S. “counties, states, … and communities
have hit a ‘tax wall’” (Yates, 2006, p. 2)– In developing countries structural adjustment has
led to less government funding and conditionalities further emphasize privatizing service delivery
Democracies & Democratization
“universal enthusiasm for democracy” (Giddens, 1994) and “global resurgence of of democracy” (Diamond & Plattner, 1993)
concerns about the vitality of democratic institutions (Elshtain, 1994; Lasch, 1994)
Privatized Democracy: implies passive citizen to avoid threat to property relations (Locke; Sehr, 1997)
Public Democracy: assumes active citizen to avoid corruption by those with private/profit interests (Rousseau; Sehr, 1997)
PPPs and Democratization (2)
PPPs applauded for:– involving “decision makers who are accountable to the public”
(Wälti et al., 2004, p. 106)– “creating stronger local NGOs [which] can strengthen civil society”
as a “countervailing power to the state” (Miller-Grandvaux et al., 2002, p. 56)
PPPs criticized for:– reducing “citizen input into the policy process” and increasing “the
influence of the private sector partner” (Rosenau, 1999, p. 17)– giving “responsibility for broader … community interests to the
whims of the private sector” (Chloe, 2002, p. 256)– Allowing “the private sector firm(s) [to] ‘steer’ while the other actors
only ‘row’” (Miraftab, 2004, p. 93)
PPPs and Democratization (2)
Advocates for PPPs stress their value in:– their “operating at arm’s length to centres of political authority” and
thus “offer[ing] greater flexibility in decision processes” (Skelcher et al., 2005, p. 574)
– that “that it is easier [“donors”] to negotiate with NGOs … [because] the political ‘messiness’ of negotiating with governments is absent” (Miller-Grandvaux et al., 2002, p. 43)
Critics of PPPs emphasize that they:– “do not accord with the doctrine of the primacy of politics”
(Skelcher et al., 2005, p. 574)– are “subject to … corporate rules” and thus are “disarticulat[ed]
with notions of deeper democracy” (Skelcher et al., 2005, p. 592)