Private public partnership is a legal arrangement made between a public and private sector to

merger on a long term basis in order to form cooperation. This agreement is often long term in
nature and is formed on various grounds that will be both conducive for the both sectors. They
often form a collaboration in the operation of majority of the very important sectors of the
economy that requires financing and operation on a high level of professional scale such as the
public works for example road or railway constructions. When the government agency and a
private institution combine for such heavy projects sooner or later it will be accomplished sooner
or later.
The viability of the project is quite high when it is operated under this partnership on the various
basis that; a private sector company is so much business oriented with intention of maximizing
profit with which ever opportunity and the public sector is also out to meet the public interest.
Both combinations are a mixture of will and desire to achieve and in most cases they thrive.
They also complement each other on the various bases like the government is often overwhelmed
with the funding and overseeing most profits in the economy and possibly can run out of funds to
see through its various projects. The private sector on the other hand is willing to venture in that
economy with the aim of making profits once the project has been accomplished. This two pieces
form a powerful jigsaw which can plough through any economic turbulence.
Typically the private partnerships often operate and a contract within the span of 25 to 30 years
in some cases even longer depending on the scale, success and nature of the contract. The private
sector mostly funds the project, design and implements the project whereas the public sector is
concerned with monitoring the progress of the project if it is in compliance with the stipulated
objectives since the government is deemed to be too busy to deal with the finer details
concerning the project. The risks and benefits of the projects according the input one has in this
project to manifest into the intended objectives.
Public private partnership has proven to be such a successful unit that by allowing massive
government projects to being successful through the funds from the private sector. This breaks
the notion of independency among these two sectors since in the very end the economy and
society as a whole benefit from this. A perfect example for this illustration is the health sector.
Health is a very pivotal sector for a society to stay healthy, on the other hand it is very expensive
to sustain and oversee. The private sector can see this business opportunity and try to venture
into this with the help of government incentives with an aim of profit maximization. The
government is also lessening with the burden of having to channel heavy investment in this
sector. Also there is a huge possibility of the private sector to bring in the new technology to sky
rocket the efficiency in this sector.
The private sector is held accountable of any form of incompetence or failure by the government
agency in order to eradicate any form of inefficiency that may crop. The private sector therefore
takes it upon them to weed out any form of menace leaving no chance of failure. This level of
efficiency, in turn the society benefits from development without resource wastage because of
the pressure from the government to see through the project. The public sector also acts as an
added security for the private sector as they will have removed any form of regulation of
operations therefore more of the private sectors would feel attracted to invest due to an added
assurance. The increased capital especially in the United States has made the federal agencies
busy in quite a positive way; they have taken this to the advantage of repairing the sectors of the
economy that requires to be attended to. Both the republican and democrats have joined hands
and seen through the legislation of this act to further the fiscal constraints to the areas that need
to be rectified or expansion of the country’s infrastructure.
Russia, china and North Korea are just a few examples of the countries that have been known to
be communists and marginalize the private sector. This proved to be terribly ineffective to the
growth of the economy, the private sector are pivotal in pulling the strings for the economy
development at quantifiable rate. Russia and China learnt from this and has practiced a bit of the
public private partnership and has resulted into numerous positives, North Korea on the other
hand has remained adamant and regressed massively relative to its neighbours like South Korea
that practices the opposite. Post the Second World War East Germany was ruled by the soviets
which for some reasons are communist and deprive the private sector; it developed slowly as
opposed to West Germany which became more industrialized because the government willingly
collaborated with the private sector (Yan, 2016).
The social aspect of this partnership, it brings about a healthy relationship between these two
extremes. It is known that these two sectors always view each other as rivals in economic aspect,
most cases government tries to regulate the private sector from exploitation and gaining
monopoly in most markets. The government also imposes high tax rates just to marginalize the
success of most private sectors. This relationship has managed to harness the best out of the two
as the private sector now operates under the close watch by the government, the government also
removes operation barriers. With reduces tension for both parties the outcome is always
successful compared to individual operations. The government as well can channel the resources
to other sectors which kind of speed up economic growth of most capitalist nations such as Great
Britain and Japan.
On a political aspect this partnership shows how much the government encourages the private
sector and is willing to join them to see them rise to the very top. The rapport between the two
even encourages the foreign investors to venture into such countries and operate freely because
they have an assurance that the government surely supports and encourages their operations. A
perfect example is why the Shell Company from the Britain is majority operational in nations
that the government has a good rapport with the private sector. The united states also have a
managed to be successful in the internet access sector as the government has formed a
partnership with private sector to enhance the citizens are served with the great internet access.
This partnership doesn’t necessarily mean that the government is trying to cut on its cost but to
ensure the quality delivered in that sector is the required (US Department of Transportation,
2019).
The government may also form partnership in sectors that are quite sensitive and cannot be left
without close supervision therefore the only license to be allowed to be operation in such sectors
is to form a partnership. Most countries have these partnerships formed in the sensitive ministries
like energy where you cannot let the private sector run itself in such sensitive ministries.
Therefore these partnerships acts like a speed governor against exploitation to the public as well
as monopoly to any other competitor in the same market. The private sector are profit oriented
and are not concerned about the public welfare provided they are making profits, hence the
government restricts some markets and only allow for only joint partnership to be allowed to
operate in them.
Public-private partnership also does occur when the project is a non-profitable and the public
cannot be charged since they are public goods. The public cannot be charged for the usage of
roads. In such a project the government and sign an agreement pact with the private sector to
build the road just to serve the public but this will be paid by the taxpayers’ money. A perfect
example is going on in Africa, most of these countries are hiring Chinese companies to make
them roads at a relatively cheaper cost but pay it on a certain agreed installment (Osei-Kyei &
Chan, 2015). This partnership is like a form of grant given to the government not in form of
money but infrastructure and payable later.
Although this partnership is so much effective but it has a couple of downsides. Because most of
these partnerships are on the basis of construction of infrastructures such as buildings, bridges
and roads, there is a possibility of an overhead cost during this operation. This overhead cost is
to be incurred by the fund provider which is the private sector and will not be compensated by
the government. The private sector as well may fail to meet the minimum required quality
standards such as hospital and school, in the process of managing the process, on completion of
the project it will not be allowed to be operational and all that input will be in vain (Makarov,
2015). Another risk is when the public might decide to demand less of the constructed
infrastructure and pay less for it relatively to the heavy investment in it. The partners will have to
bear the risk.
It might be thought that on the other hand the government might be doing this to venture in
markets it is not able to thrive in to either determine the income it generates to be able to adjust it
legislation to gain more control or tax more from the secretly booming sector and most private
organizations walk off from the offer to work together (Kociemska, 2019). To some extent they
seem right because of the notion that the government always want to control everything. But on a
broader perspective this is for the overall performance welfare of a nation less risks and more
productivity to the economy and as well as the both parties objectives.