A public-private partnership ( PPP or English public-private partnership - PPP ) is a contractual collaboration between the public sector and companies of the private sector in a special purpose vehicle . The aim of PPP is the division of labor, with the private partner taking responsibility for the efficient creation of the service, while the public sector ensures that goals oriented towards the common good are observed. The public sector expects the partnership with the private sector to relieve the strained public budgets, since the private entrepreneur takes care of all or part of the financing himself and therefore has to pay attention to the profitability of the project. PPP is usually similar to a rental or lease agreement .
General and delimitation
PPP is the mostly long-term contractual cooperation between the public sector and the private sector, in which the necessary resources ( e.g. know-how , operating resources , capital and personnel ) are brought in by the partners for mutual benefit in a common organizational context and existing project risks are in line with the risk management competence of the Project partners are distributed. In terms of privatization law, public-private partnerships stand between task privatization (material privatization) and organizational privatization (formal privatization). In the latter case, the public administration agency only uses a company form under private law; in the former case, the previously sovereign task is completely or partially transferred to the market, because state supervision usually remains in place.
For public clients, PPP represents a new form of procurement that should be used if it is more in line with the legal requirements of economy and efficiency than other available forms of procurement for the specific project. A specific characteristic is the transfer of tasks from the public client to a private provider of such integrated services across all phases of the life cycle, from the contractor's point of view as many as possible, at least four of the value-added stages of planning, building, financing, maintaining and operating.
The definition of PPP results in a wide variety of possible areas of application, including transport, supply, disposal and public building construction. The illustration opposite shows application areas with examples.
The rise in public debt with the result of scarce financial resources and the simultaneous pending public investment prompted the public sector to look for new financing options. If there are no concessions to develop water, gas and electricity infrastructure projects (which already existed in the 19th century), it was not until 1987 that public authorities were no longer strictly against private capital as the basis for financing public projects. An early example is the New Frankfurt project between 1925 and 1930, where the city and private investors each shared half of the costs. Possibly the first (and still existing) example of a PPP is the Folkwang Museum , which has been in operation in Essen since 1922. The basis is a cooperation agreement concluded in the same year between the private Folkwang Museum Association , in which large companies, banks and private patrons came together, and the city of Essen. Since both partners are equally owners of the museum's collections, this is the case of a PPP based on the so-called social model.
The participation of the European Investment Bank in PPP projects goes back to the loans that were granted in the country of origin, Great Britain, after the Eurotunnel project (France / Great Britain) was founded in July 1987. The UK's Private Finance Initiative (PFI) from December 2001 is considered to be the first systematic, government-designed project by a state to use private capital for public projects.
The vast majority of PPP projects are carried out in Great Britain. The prestige project for the renovation and operation of the London Underground began in 2002 . London was to pay a total of 45 billion euros in rents to investors within 30 years. But as early as 2007, the investors went bankrupt. London had to take on the investor's obligations and start over under its own steam. Structural deficiencies were found in school projects, and in hospitals and prisons there was so much personnel savings that the quality of care, security and food was often endangered. The first-time investors often sell the contracts on to other investors who are looking for higher returns. In 2011, a committee of the English Parliament concluded that no evidence of the benefits of the PPP process could be found. The long term makes the contracts inflexible, the award of contracts is expensive. The long-term agreed rents are actually a hidden borrowing, but they are not shown in the public budget.
In March 2003, the EU Commission first published “Guidelines for Successful PPP Projects”, which should help project managers to reconcile the goals of the public and private sectors.
The ECB's low interest rate policy, which began during the Greek crisis and has continued to this day (mid-2017), has massively changed the framework conditions for PPPs. Government bonds of the Federal Republic of Germany were even listed below zero percent at times. Nevertheless, the transport minister in the Merkel III cabinet , Alexander Dobrindt (CSU), advocates partial privatization.
Since then, states and supranational institutions have used PPPs as a softer alternative to privatization . At the end of 2007 there was a volume of EUR 73.8 billion in PPP projects, of which EUR 54.7 billion had been created between 2005 and 2007. The largest PPP market is Great Britain with a share of 42.2 billion euros (57%), followed by Italy (29.8 billion euros; 40%), Germany (9.5 billion euros; 13%) and Greece with a share of 6.3 billion euros In Germany in 2010, around 66% of the market share in the financing of PPPs came from the savings bank organization and 22% from the other banking sector.
The granting of credit to a project company is a constitutive element of a PPP structure. The project company, which is usually organized under private law, acts as a borrower . It sells ( forfaits ) its claims against the municipality or assigns them to a bank; At the same time, the municipality gives the bank a complete waiver of objection .
In the meantime, the legal prerequisites have also been created in most countries or the PPP partners have developed contractual arrangements that enable the private sector to borrow within PPP projects at better municipal credit conditions. In general, this is permissible if the claims of a project company organized under private law against the public sector are sold / assigned to banks as part of real forfaiting and at the same time the public debtor waives all defenses at least in the amount of the loan service. Because of the waiver of objection, the public sector still has to meet the claim even if the project company fails to perform, so that credit institutions are treated as if they had concluded a loan agreement directly with the public debtor; because the loan servicing is not affected by any service disruptions within the contractual relationship between the municipality and the project company.
Types of PPP
PPP commonly stands for a special type of functional privatization. In contrast to material privatization, the state only partially lets go of a task that has hitherto been publicly performed and only draws in private economic agents. This is why we often speak of partial privatization. The sovereign responsibility for performance remains unaffected. Contractual structures can take a wide variety of forms. Because of this, it is difficult to classify PPP constructions in defined models, since a clear delimitation is seldom successful. However, the European Commission makes a distinction between contract-based PPPs and institutionalized PPPs. In the case of contractual PPP projects, the cooperation relationship between public and private partners is regulated purely by contract, while in institutionalized PPP a new company is founded that is financed by mixed capital from public and private investors.
Nevertheless, according to the extensive information provided by the PPP task force in the BMVBS or the "PPP in public building construction" report, a list of the PPP contract models that are common today should be made.
The operator model usually provides that the private entrepreneur plans, builds, finances and operates an infrastructure project at his own risk; He is the owner and bears the economic risk. A single-purpose company is usually set up for these projects. The operating costs and the debt service are raised through fees that users have to pay for using the facility. The private operator provides its services either in the name and for the account of the municipality or as a concessionaire in its own name. The basis is always an operator or concession contract in which the municipality secures control and access rights.
Under the designation BOT (English build, operate, transfer , translated construction, operation, transfer) an operator model is common, which provides for the turnkey construction of plants including the financing of the start-up costs and comprehensive project management as well as the takeover for the start-up phase. At the end of the project period, the project is transferred to the end user. BOTs with terms of up to 30 years and more, especially when building infrastructure systems such as power plants or airports, are common. The British Embassy in Berlin was built according to the standards of the British Private Finance Initiative (PFI).
The private contractor takes on the planning, construction, financing and operation of a property owned by him. B. a property that is used by the public sector. At the end of the contract, ownership of the property and building is transferred to the contracting authority. The remuneration consists of a regular payment to the contractor; it is determined when the contract is concluded and contains components for planning, construction, operation, financing and acquisition of the property including the property, including possible surcharges for the business profit, which also covers the transfer of risk. The duration of the contract is usually 20 to 30 years.
The private contractor takes over the planning, construction, financing and operation of e.g. B. a property or a street that is used and owned by the public sector. The remuneration consists of a regular payment to the contractor; it is determined when the contract is concluded and contains components for planning, construction, operation and financing, including possible surcharges for the commercial profit, which also covers the transfer of risk.
The private contractor takes over the planning, construction, financing, operation and optionally the exploitation of a property. In contrast to the PPP buyer model, there is no obligation to transfer ownership of the building at the end of the contract period. Rather, the contractor has an option to either return the property or to take it over at a previously agreed residual value. In addition to the purchase option, rental extension options or realization agreements are also possible. The client pays leasing installments as a usage fee. Components of the installments are fees for the (partial) amortization of the planning, construction and financing costs as well as the operation (facility management) including risk surcharge.
The rental model largely corresponds to the leasing model, but without a purchase option. The building can be acquired at the market value to be determined at the time the contract expires. The client pays regular installments to the contractor in a fixed amount; Components of these rates are the fee for the transfer of use and operation (facility management).
The private contractor undertakes to plan, build and operate facilities for the public sector (building license) and to provide certain services to users (service license). The private partner finances itself directly from the users via entrance fees, tolls and parking fees. If the private partner overestimates the usage volume, he is not given the opportunity to refinance the project through charging or to generate profits. In order to promote these models nonetheless, payments can be made by the public purse (e.g. start-up financing or final payments). Concession models are often used in transport infrastructure projects, in which a distinction is made between A and F models. With A models, the user pays the fee to the public sector, which forwards it to the private partner. In the case of F models, the private partner is authorized to claim the fee directly from the users.
The most intensive form of PPP takes place within the framework of the so-called mixed-economic companies , which have both public and private shareholders: partly as a modification of the operator models, partly private shareholders are only financially involved.
In the social model or cooperation model, the public sector and private partners establish and operate an institution through a joint company. According to the definition given above, however, only those mixed-economy companies are to be understood as PPPs in which the private parties involved not only want a financing transaction, but the partners bring their different competencies to the company.
Operational management model
With the management model, the public sector itself remains the owner of the facility. It is only provided that the private operator operates the facility in the name of the public authority for a fee. Typically, operational management includes operation, maintenance and repair as well as technical and commercial administration.
Business leasing model
The so-called leasing model is considered an intermediate form between the operator model and the operational management model . The public sector is withdrawing more from the ongoing operation of the facility. The private operator has more room to maneuver, for example he can often act externally.
A basic distinction must be made between PPP projects in public building construction and those in the transport sector. In principle, all models can be used in public building construction; the models described above have established themselves in particular, such as:
- Availability model
- Concession model
- Social model
In the transport infrastructure, there are basically three types of models:
- Availability model
- Operator model, according to the highway construction private financing law
- Federal government expansion program
Reasons and Risks
The expectation of an economic benefit for the public finances is usually the central motivation for PPPs. An average of ten to fifteen percent cost savings are quoted. The economic advantage is determined by means of comparative calculations that compare the conventional implementation (Public Sector Comparator, PSC) with that via PPP. The calculation of the PSC alone represents a break with traditional methods of public finance, since here all costs associated with a measure are included as far as possible ("holistic" consideration, for example inclusion of repair costs over the entire service life and not just the pure construction investment) and the costs are usually viewed over several decades; often over the entire life cycle. If the advantageousness has been proven through corresponding cost analyzes and is politically desired (see section Criticism ), the price is also the most heavily weighted criterion in almost all cases when selecting a provider in the subsequent invitation to tender for the PPP project. Usually the present value of the offer is decisive. This is the net present value of the annual, usually constant fees to be paid by the sponsor for operation and debt servicing over the term of the contract. The discount factor is specified by the sponsor.
For the public sector, which is often heavily indebted, a pull-forward effect for PPP investments can occur to the extent that an often lengthy budget planning for own (new) borrowing is no longer necessary. In addition, there is time savings in PPP projects through faster completion on schedule and on budget, as well as increased efficiency through the purely business management of private individuals in the maintenance and operation of the systems.
According to the maxim that the state and the private sector should concentrate on their respective strengths and core competencies, the service for the user and the overall efficiency in the provision of services are optimized. The private companies already have many years of experience in the optimal design of certain project types, especially in building construction, and can therefore better assess the existing project and operational risks and opportunities, so that PPP can achieve a more economical service provision in the interests of all.
Private companies expect new, profitable business areas from participating in PPP projects. The finance industry expects the PPP business in Germany in the credit and equity market to generate a new “asset” category, which has lagged behind the development in other countries such as Great Britain for decades.
The state also makes itself more dependent on the private sector. On the other hand, there is the potential gain in efficiency and the possibility for the public sector to invest free of new debt.
There is a risk that if the project is not adequately monitored and licensed, control by the authorities will be lost. A negative example was provided by the Toll Collect consortium , which was only able to introduce the truck toll in Germany more than a year later than the contractually agreed date. The contracts of this PPP model are not freely accessible even to members of the Bundestag. This makes public control much more difficult.
From a budgetary point of view, PPP only works like a new loan taken out by the public sector if no or only inadequate risks and opportunities have been transferred to the private sector (e.g. forfaiting model). According to the Eurostat rules that apply throughout the EU , a PPP project is not part of the public debt if the construction and the market risk have been transferred to the private sector.
The systemic overall view of a PPP also includes indirect costs, e.g. B. if a PPP contract includes that pension claims are no longer fully borne by the private partner, but are taken over in the long term by the state or if previously full-time publicly owned employees are now replaced by low-wage earners through cost-saving measures and then have to be topped up by the public . The taxpayer may indirectly bear the systemic costs. The alternative procurement method may then be more expensive for the state in comparison to the isolated costs of providing goods and services, which are purely related to the company.
If the public sector is allowed to quantify the systemic dependencies of a PPP on the basis of independent scientific analyzes (e.g. not restricted by contract secrecy for public discussion of details in the Bundestag), the decision on the usefulness of PPP cannot be based on evidence with regard to possible restrictions the common good or negative effects on taxpayers in competition with economic interests are examined. Also, not all concepts with regard to evidence-based systemic quantification of the consequences and democratic legitimation and verification are currently mature. As a result, many decision-makers, committees and officials, in view of the untested administrative procedures in PPPs, are more inclined to carry out planning and procurement on their own as before. In many areas in Germany there is still a legal and administrative procedural uncertainty that should not be underestimated. In general, there is a risk that PPP projects will become more expensive than their possible purely public alternatives.
The Federal Audit Office and the audit offices of all federal states determined in a joint analysis in 2011 that the profitability of PPP projects had not been proven and in many cases not given.
Conflict of goals
The idea of a win-win situation and the expansion to include services of general interest are criticized . There is a conflict of objectives : politics is oriented towards the common good and therefore has to look after the interests of those people when allocating resources who cannot or only insufficiently inquire about their needs through their purchasing power. The main goal of a company, on the other hand, is to maximize profit for its owners. This means that there is a risk of the range of services deteriorating due to the mostly monopoly- like exclusive contracts.
For the Attac organization , the common practice of keeping privatization contracts confidential is the greatest point of criticism of PPP. It is therefore often not possible to make any statements about the profitability of PPP projects. According to the principal-agent problem, there is the problem of asymmetrical information distribution .
According to Article 20, Paragraph 2 of the Basic Law, every state authority comes from the people. Every decision made by the administrator must therefore be traced back to the sovereign of the people. However, if public resources are tied up in a mixed-economic company, the administration may have too little influence on the decision-making process for the use of public resources and the range of services. On the contrary: private individuals who are not constitutionally legitimized make decisions that affect the common good. Under certain circumstances, this leads to the fact that public funds do not sufficiently benefit the common good, but primarily benefit the private partner.
Concealed national debt
The Green Group leader Anton Hofreiter sees the danger of hidden national debt or municipal shadow debt . Similarly, the comment by Harald Schumann : “The only advantage of the“ partnership ”with banks and construction companies is that the state's payment obligations over decades are not counted towards its debt ratio” ().
Criticism from Werner Rügemer
The publicist Werner Rügemer diagnosed a “trace of failure” on the basis of the course of previous PPP projects and research on site. Various forms of failure can be identified:
- The investor goes into bankruptcy in the first few years , the public sector has to take over the investor's obligations and start again with a loss, for example at the leisure and bathing park of the city of Leimen in Baden-Württemberg and with numerous other bathing projects such as the Keitum-Therme on Sylt.
- The investor increases the rent by making additional demands, well above the amount initially agreed, for example at the 90 schools in the Offenbach district and at the Hamburg Elbphilharmonie .
- For the Warnow Tunnel in Rostock and the Trave Tunnel in Lübeck, the calculations made by the investors Hochtief , Bilfinger Berger and Bouygues turned out to be fine; therefore the terms of the contracts have been increased from 30 to 40 or 50 years, so that residents and other motorists have to pay toll longer and ownership of the tunnels is not transferred to the municipalities until later than agreed.
- After all, projects fail because the investor cannot fulfill his contractual obligations, for example with the project of the digital citizen portal that the city of Würzburg had agreed with the Bertelsmann subsidiary Arvato "Würzburg integrated!"
Rügemer attributes these diverse forms of failure to structural elements of the PPP process: confidentiality of contracts, private arbitration , forfaiting with waiver of objections (sale of rent claims to a bank), high transaction and consultancy costs, membership of the relevant consultants in the organized PPP lobby, The investor's sole right of determination in the case of subcontractors, etc. a. In the meantime, PPP has also been heavily criticized in business circles: “In PPP, corporations, banks and consultants earn big money. Together with the public sector, they have created a non-transparent system - at the expense of medium-sized businesses and taxpayers. "
Review by George Monbiot
The English publicist George Monbiot has documented the failure of the PPP principle in detail on the basis of the PPP showcase project Skye Bridge . In order to guarantee the project the appearance of success, the British government had made substantial financial advance payments, although according to the idea of PPP the financing should actually be private. In addition, the state had compensated private builders for cost overruns and thereby refuted the alleged advantages of PPP such as risk transfer and efficient cost management. In the end, the bridge cost the public (motorists, taxpayers) around £ 93 million . Had the state built the bridge itself, it would have cost a maximum of £ 15 million.
Documentation "The Looted State"
The NDR television documentary “The Plundered State” (2013) by Stefan Aust and Thomas Ammann shows in detail the disadvantages of PPP projects: Confidentiality of contracts, no parliamentary control, susceptibility to corruption and lack of profitability are documented in detail. The authors use the expansion of the A1 motorway between Hamburg and Bremen, the construction of a new prison in Rostock and the Elbphilharmonie Hamburg as examples . In addition to many interview partners, Dieter Engels , President of the Federal Audit Office from 2002 to 2014, has a say. He points out that the companies involved, unlike the state, have to generate profits, but that, conversely, their borrowing costs are higher than those of the state. This connection alone usually makes PPP uneconomical. The authors document in detail the possibility of circumventing the debt brake through PPP projects.
Criticism of the ÖPP Deutschland AG
In Germany, the ÖPP Deutschland AG is criticized because banks, consultants and construction companies hold shares in the ÖPP Deutschland AG and at the same time benefit from public-private partnerships. Ulrich Müller, chairman of the lobby control organization , called for the PPP Deutschland AG to be dissolved , as it was an invitation to lobbying at the expense of the citizens. The chairwoman of Transparency International Germany, Edda Müller , said that “clear client and contractor relationships are clearly preferable to public-private partnerships from the point of view of corruption prevention”. This is u. a. also topic at Mario Barth reveals! been.
Criticism of the example of realized motorway projects
According to a report by the German Federal Audit Office, 5 of the 6 PPP motorway projects (also known as private motorways ) had become more expensive by 2014 than would have been the case with conventional implementation. A major motivation for using PPP is the pre-financing of construction costs by private individuals and thus the possibility of circumventing the debt brake .
The largest and most controversial PPP project to date was the A1 conversion between Hamburg and Bremen , which took place over the years . Telekom and Daimler (formerly Toll Collect consortium) were involved in the "revenue" of the motorway by collecting the truck toll. The operation of a 72.5-kilometer section of the A1 between Bremen and Hamburg in return for the truck toll revenue by the A1 mobil consortium turned out to be uneconomical in 2017. Therefore, the consortium raised claims from the federal government in the order of 640 to 787 million euros in order to prevent bankruptcy. According to a report in the Berliner Zeitung, the government was aware of these problems, but kept them secret while other PPP projects were pushed.
Application and projects by country
According to Volker Schaedel, the term PPP in Germany has been used in an undifferentiated manner since its inception and perceived in a vague manner. It was used to describe a large number of activities and ideas that have only very little to do with the original idea of public-private partnership:
- PPP is a form of functional privatization.
- The private financing of public works is sometimes referred to as PPP. PPPs are not just about financing models, but about organizational models. A financing service can very well be understood as a task.
- In municipalities, the term PPP is often associated with the hope of being able to implement projects that could not be financed up to now. It is correct that a project cannot be implemented as a PPP without adequate financial resources.
Public-private partnerships have existed in Germany since the late 1990s. The following is a historical overview of the time it was created until 2010:
|year||Political development and laws|
|1999||Partial privatization of Berliner Wasserbetriebe|
|March||1. Business symposium construction in Weimar|
|May||Foundation of the SPD working group on public-private partnerships|
|June||Constitution of the inter-ministerial working group "Private Infrastructure Financing"|
|August||Constitution of the inter-ministerial working group "Private Sector Realization of Public Buildings"|
|October||NRW is the first federal state to start a PPP initiative: "International PPP Symposium"|
|March||2. Business symposium construction in Weimar|
|June||Announcement of a PPP competence center at federal level|
|July||BUND: Founding of the steering committee “Private Sector Realization Public. Buildings "|
|August||Establishment of a cross-departmental project group PPP in the Ministry of Finance of Saxony-Anhalt|
|October||BUND: inclusion of PPP in the coalition agreement between SPD and Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen|
|November||Hessian law on the construction and financing of public roads by private individuals|
|March||3rd business symposium construction in Weimar|
|March||Foundation of the private PPP competence center Berlin-Brandenburg|
|June||BUND: Traffic Infrastructure Financing Act and establishment of the VIFG, the Toll Ordinance comes into force|
|December||Foundation of the Federal Association of Public Private Partnership eV|
|January||CDU / CSU found working group PPP|
|February||Foundation of the PPP competence center of the Schleswig-Holstein Investment Bank|
|March||4th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|March||Initiation of a "discussion round PPP" in the Supreme Building Authority in the Bavarian State Ministry of the Interior|
|April||Establishment of the regional PPP Berlin-Brandenburg forum|
|July||BUND: Founding of the PPP task force in the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing|
|November||BUND: Establishment of the PPP Acceleration Act working group|
|November||Kick-off event for PPP in Baden-Württemberg|
|December||Selection of state PPP pilot projects by an inter-ministerial working group (Hessen)|
|December||PPP working group at the Thuringian Ministry of Building and Transport|
|March||Foundation of the PPP competence center (Hessen)|
|March||5th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|April||Founding of the PPP task force in the Saxony-Anhalt Ministry of Finance|
|May||BUND: Establishment of a working group "Economic feasibility studies in PPP projects"|
|June||BUND: Approval of the PPP Acceleration Act in the Federal Council|
|November||BUND: PPP included in the coalition agreement|
|December||Initiation of the foundation of the association "PPP in Hessen"|
|December||Establishment of the Lower Saxony PPP competence network|
|January||BUND: Objective of a PPP quota of 15 percent|
|March||6th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|April||BUND: Establishment of the PPP Simplification Act working group|
|May||SAIs take a position on PPP|
|August||Law to facilitate PPP (Schleswig-Holstein)|
|December||BUND: The toll route expansion ordinance comes into force, concept for establishing a partnership in Germany|
|March 27, 2007||1st National PPP Workshop in the Hospital Sector; Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development , GSK, Strategy Consultants International|
|March||7th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|July||Establishment of the PPP contact point of the ILB (Brandenburg)|
|December||Decision of the Federal Cabinet to establish a Partnership Germany ( PPP Germany AG)|
|March||8th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|April 27, 2008||2. National PPP workshop in the hospital sector; Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, GSK, Strategy Consultants International|
|June||Foundation of the PartnerRegio development bank network|
|September||BUND: Presentation of the 100th PPP project in public building construction|
|November||BUND: Founding of the ÖPP Deutschland AG|
|December||BUND: Signing of the framework agreement between ÖPP Deutschland AG and 10 federal states, 82 municipalities and 33 other public clients|
|February||Dissolution of the PPP task force in the Federal Ministry for Transport, Building and Urban Development|
|March||9th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|May 7, 2009||3. National PPP workshop in the hospital sector; Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, GSK, Strategy Consultants International|
|May||BUND: 1st general meeting of ÖPP Deutschland AG|
|August||BUND: Sale of federal shares in ÖPP Deutschland AG to federal states and municipal umbrella organizations|
|September||BUND: Start of the award procedure for the acquisition of further shares in the ÖPP Deutschland Beteiligungs-GmbH|
|October||BUND: Signing the coalition agreement - PPP in building construction no longer plays a role here, has established itself as a procurement variant|
|March||10th business symposium construction in Weimar|
|23–24 September 2010||41st National PPP workshop in the hospital sector in connection with the Lübeck Symposium at the Aachen University Clinic AÖR, Association of German Clinic Directors, University Clinics, GSK, Strategy Consultants International|
The PPP is also used in those areas that are rather vaguely described as services of general interest . There are PPPs in a wide variety of areas, whereby the design also depends on the specialist laws of the respective subject areas. Here, as in building construction in general, Public Private Partnership is understood as a project implementation of public infrastructure measures under the private pursuit of profit, which if possible encompasses the entire life cycle of a construction project (not identical to the conventional product life cycle ), for example a building (see graphic opposite).
Consulting company Partnerships Germany
On July 9, 2008, in the presence of the Federal Minister of Finance Peer Steinbrück and the Federal Minister of Construction Wolfgang Tiefensee, the framework agreement for the establishment of the new federally initiated consulting company Partnerships Germany was signed. It is supposed to advise the federal, state and local governments on basic issues of PPP projects. German industry is involved through a private investment company. It has not yet become clear to what extent this side is exerting influence. The executive board consists of a dual leadership with a representative from the Ministry of Finance and a representative from industry. At the beginning of 2009 the ÖPP Deutschland AG (Partnerships Germany) started its operational activities.
The IT project Herkules of the Bundeswehr is currently the largest PPP project in Europe.
A controversial project in public building construction is the rebuilding of the Berlin City Palace , which, according to the planning of the former Federal Minister Manfred Stolpe, should be possible within the framework of a public-private financing partnership.
PPP is also increasingly being used by local authorities whose debt situation, in the opinion of the state supervisory authorities, no longer permits the refurbishment of buildings financed by loans. In public building construction, new school building and school renovation measures have so far been the main drivers of this procurement variant. School buildings, especially in Hesse, have been given long-term to private companies under leasehold agreements, only to be immediately rented again. The private companies undertake to renovate the buildings and receive rental payments from the responsible local authority over a period of 20 to 40 years. As a rule, these rent payments are higher than the capital market interest rates due for a loan-financed renovation ; In addition, the local authorities involved have to bear “ancillary costs”, for example for advice and business management, in some cases considerable amounts.
The Hamburg Elbphilharmonie is a major project of the PPP. After ten years of construction, the completion costs increased tenfold. The Waldeck correctional facility was built in PPP and there were indications of bribery (“private-private partnership”).
The Hünfeld penal institution in Hesse is now the first prison in Germany to be operated as a PPP.
Supply / disposal
Aided by the German Recycling and Waste Management Act , numerous PPP projects have also emerged in Germany in the field of waste disposal . For example, (1) KrW- / AbfG expressly gives the bodies responsible for disposal the opportunity to use third parties to fulfill their disposal obligations, while the responsibility for performance remains with the bodies.
The water supply for Berlin was privatized in cooperation with the French group Veolia Environnement . This made the costs for the citizens of Berlin 20–30% more expensive.
Communication, radio / television
With the privatization of the Deutsche Bundespost, the German broadcasting network was largely taken over by Telekom and Media Broadcast . At the end of the 1990s, with the help of TRANSRADIO SenderSysteme Berlin AG, many stations were digitized with new transmission standards and the LW and MW networks were then heavily decimated.
One focus is the transport sector, where PPP models, in addition to the truck toll, also carry out larger infrastructure projects such as the Warnow tunnel in Rostock and the Herrentunnel in Lübeck. The first PPP pilot project in motorway construction was completed in 2010 with the commissioning of the northern route of federal motorway 4 near Eisenach . In the meantime (as of August 2017) seven such PPP projects are in operation and others are under construction or planning.
On November 30, 2016, the Federal Court of Auditors submitted an opinion with regard to the Federal Government's deliberations on the privatization of the federal trunk road network. In it he points out several problem areas.
In the case of the truck toll (" Toll Collect "), the weak position of the public sector was also evident in federal projects. Because the investors Daimler, Telekom and cofiroute were only able to make the installations on the motorways and in the trucks functional with a delay of almost two years, the state suffered a revenue loss of over 4 billion euros. The claim for damages filed by the federal government in the private arbitration tribunal in 2004 - the amount of the amount accrued in the meantime, including interest and contractual penalties, is around 7 billion euros - has not yet been decided; the federal government was ready (as of October 2013) to forego at least 4.5 billion euros.
One of the best-known projects is the construction and operation of the Nord Autobahn by the Bonaventura Consortium . The construction period should be relatively short at three years. The revenues of the private partners are based on the motorway toll .
In another project, a section of a former federal road will be built from 2010 , or expanded and supplemented.
On the former armory site in Burgdorf, Canton Bern, the cantonal administration center "Neumatt" has been in operation since spring 2012. In addition to 450 administrative jobs, it includes a work yard and a regional prison with 110 prison places. Neumatt "was implemented as a PPP pilot project for Switzerland according to international standards.
If a broad definition of PPP is assumed, projects by some international health protection organizations that are financed by both public and private organizations can also be considered PPP. Examples of this are various WHO projects, as WHO is also funded by industry and foundations . The largest are:
- Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI): 75 percent (750 million US dollars) is financed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation , which, unlike the UN organizations, also has a permanent seat on the board of directors.
- Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN)
- Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis (Global Fund).
- Wolfgang Gerstlberger, Karsten Schneider: Public Private Partnerships. Interim balance, empirical findings and outlook. Edition Sigma , Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-8360-7231-1 .
- Ramin Goodarzi: Public Private Partnership, on the public tender for the successful community of state and private sector. VDM Verlag Dr. Müller , 2008, ISBN 978-3-639-01304-7 .
- Martin Henze: Public Private Partnership; Modern forms of cooperation and strategy concepts for clinics. 2nd Edition. Baumbach Fachverlage, Kulmbach 2009, ISBN 978-3-938610-74-9 .
- Martin Henze: Public-private partnership models, outsourcing, FM PPP. In: ku-special. Insourcing-Outsourcing Integration. 12/2006.
- Martin Henze: PPP is more than just financing, an innovative investment and working capital financing concept. In: KU health magazine. 6/2009.
- Martina Kubanek: Study on the use of public-private partnerships in the Polish health sector. Univ. Verlag TU Berlin, 2008, ISBN 978-3-7983-2076-5 .
- Jürgen Kühling, Thomas Schreiner: Basic Problems of Public Private Partnerships . In: ZJS . 2/2011, pp. 112-122. (PDF file, 151 kB)
- Bettina Meyer-Hofmann, Frank Riemenschneider, Oliver Weihrauch (eds.); Gabriele Altenhofen (arrangement): Public Private Partnership. Drafting of service description, financing, tendering and contracts in practice. 2nd Edition. Cologne et al. 2008.
- Werner Rügemer: " Locusts " in public space: Public-Private Partnership - Anatomy of a global financial instrument . expanded and updated edition. Transcript-Verlag, 2012, ISBN 978-3-8376-1741-2 .
- Barbara Weber, Hans Wilhelm Alfen: Infrastructure Investments - Project Financing and PPP - Practical Guide for PPP and Other Project Financing. Bank-Verlag, Cologne 2008, ISBN 978-3-86556-189-3 .
- Kalliopi Chamakou: The public-private partnership as a new instrument for action between public law and civil law. A comparative law study on structure and function; Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2011,
- Urs Bolz, Melanie Kunzmann, Thomas Müller-Tschumi: Public Private Partnership (PPP), Building Construction Practical Guide , revision 2016, with experience from the PPP pilot project Neumatt / BE, Association PPP Switzerland (ed.)
- List of links for PPP associations at EU, federal and state level as well as in other European and non-European countries.
- EU Green Paper on Public-Private Partnerships
- European PPP Expertise Center , European Investment Bank
- Werner Rügemer : Public Private Partnership: Die Plünderung des Staates In: Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik , 2/2010, pp. 75–84.
- Duden : Public-private-Partnership, the
- Daniela Kirsch, Public Private Partnership ; Writings on real estate economics, 4; Cologne: Müller, 1999, ISBN 3-481-01346-9 ; also Diss. Saarbrücken, 1996, p. 29
- Martin Henze: Public Private Partnership; Modern forms of cooperation and strategy concepts for clinics. 2nd Edition. Baumbach Fachverlage, Kulmbach 2009, ISBN 978-3-938610-74-9 .
- Hans Wilhelm Alfen, Volker Schaedel: Guide to participation opportunities for medium-sized construction companies in the PPP business area. In: Hans Wilhelm Alfen (Ed.): Series of publications by the Professorship of Business Administration in Building ( Memento from May 13, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), Volume 5; Weimar, 2008, ISBN 978-3-86068-344-6 , p. 20.
- Hans Wilhelm Alfen: Lecture Public Private Partnership. Bauhaus University Weimar, Faculty of Civil Engineering
- Museum Folkwan ( Memento of 28 December 2018 Internet Archive )
- EIB: Evaluation of PPP projects financed by the EIB, March 2005, p. 15. (PDF; 733 kB)
- The Private Finance Initiative , House of Commons, Research Paper 01/117 of December 18, 2001 (PDF; 306 kB)
- House of Commons, Treasury Committee: Private Finance Initiative. London, August 2011, p. 14.
- Werner Rügemer: "Locusts" in public space. Public Private Partnership - Anatomy of a Global Financial Instrument . Bielefeld 2012, p. 29 ff.
- House of Commons, Treasury Committee: Private Finance Initiative. London, August 2011, p. 3 (Summary)
- EU Commission, Guidelines for successful Private-Public-Partnerships (PDF, 1 MB), see especially p. 14.
- sueddeutsche.de August 23, 2017 / Markus Balser: Autobahn privatization suffers severe setback
- David Hall: PPPs in the EU - A Critical Appraisal ( Memento from September 24, 2015 in the Internet Archive ), October 2008, p. 5 with tables from Public Private Finance / DLA Piper ( MS Word ; 662 kB)
- DSGV No. 42, May 2011, Sparkasse und Kommune , p. 13.
- PPP series, Volume 1, Effects of the financial market crisis on PPP, especially in building construction , November 2010, p. 65. (PDF; 1.0 MB)
- BAFin circular (then BAKred) dated August 6, 1997, case no. III 1 - 184.108.40.206
- Kalliopi Chamakou: The public-private partnership as a new instrument for action between public law and civil law. A comparative law study on structure and function; Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2011, pp. 72-73
- PPP Task Force in the BMVBS: Overview PPP - contract models ( Memento from July 11, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF file, 19 kB); last accessed on April 27, 2011.
- Maria Wolter: BOT in the building industry: Fundamentals, risk management, practical examples , Springer-Verlag, Berlin 2004, ISBN 3-540-04394-2 , p. 6.
- Kalliopi Chamakou: The public-private partnership as a new instrument for action between public law and civil law. A comparative law study on structure and function . Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2011, p. 75 .
- Kalliopi Chamakou: The public-private partnership as a new instrument for action between public law and civil law. A comparative law study on structure and function . Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2011, p. 82-83 .
- Main Association of the German Construction Industry: PPP Platform / Transport Infrastructure ( Memento from August 26, 2010 in the Internet Archive ); last accessed on April 27, 2011.
- Main Association of the German Construction Industry: Operator models (F model) ( Memento from March 12, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
- Main Association of the German Construction Industry: Expansion program of the federal government (A models) ( Memento from April 13, 2016 in the Internet Archive )
- Rudolf Scharping, Frank Baumgärtner, Thomas Esser: Public Private Partnerships in Germany: The Handbook. With a register of all relevant PPP projects . Frankfurter Allgemeine Buch, Frankfurt am Main 2009, ISBN 978-3-89981-183-4 .
- Detlef Borchers: Contracts for truck tolls remain secret , message on heise.de from May 22, 2006, accessed on April 27, 2011.
- Wolfgang J. Koschnick : The unspeakable misery of public-private partnerships (PPP) . In: telepolis , December 19, 2015. "Most PPP projects for the public sector are significantly more expensive than a personal investment"
- Joint experience report on the profitability of PPP projects , edited by the presidents of the federal and state audit offices, Wiesbaden, September 14, 2011, accessed on February 11, 2017.
- attac AG privatization: secrecy - the breeding ground for PPP ; last accessed on April 27, 2011.
- Konrad Fischer: In the tube . In: Wirtschaftswoche , No. 15, April 7, 2012, p. 23.
- Timot Szent-Ivanyi: State seeks donors , Frankfurter Rundschau , July 2, 2014
- Private investments only benefit the financial sector - Tsp., September 18, 2014
- Werner Rügemer: "Locusts" in public space. Public Private Partnership - Anatomy of a Global Financial Instrument . Bielefeld 2012, chapter "failed projects", p. 191 ff.
- Werner Rügemer: "Locusts" in public space. Public Private Partnership - Anatomy of a Global Financial Instrument . Bielefeld 2012, p. 108 ff., 192
- Werner Rügemer: "Locusts" in public space. Public Private Partnership - Anatomy of a Global Financial Instrument . Bielefeld 2012, p. 132 f.
- Werner Rügemer: Flop with a signal effect. Bertelsmann subsidiary Arvato and the city of Würzburg sneak out of the praised project. In: young world. October 16, 2013.
- Christian Salewski: The self-service. In: impulse. February 2012, pp. 16–25 (cover story)
- George Monbiot, A Scandal of Secrecy and Collusion
- The plundered state - Secret billion deals in Germany , summary on 3Sat
- Kurzbios of the authors ( Memento of 24 December 2014 Internet Archive )
- Stefan Aust, Thomas Ammann: 45 minutes - The plundered state - Secret billion deals in Germany on YouTube
- http Partnerschaften-deutschland.de/
- Kai Schlieter: Statutory parasitism . taz.de from February 1, 2012, accessed on February 1, 2012.
- Mario Barth reveals! on May 20, 2015, 8:15 p.m. on RTL
- PPP projects in Germany: Privately built motorways are more expensive. In: Spiegel Online. June 12, 2014, accessed September 18, 2016 .
- Roland Kirbach: Germany's most dangerous street. In: The time. No. 29 of July 15, 2010, pp. 13-15.
- The looted state: Secret deals of politics and economy ( Memento of March 7, 2014 in the Internet Archive ), ARTE documentary February 2014
- Standstill agreement with the banks. In: manager-magazin.de. August 27, 2017, accessed September 1, 2017 .
- Kai Schlieter: Privatization of the A1: Dobrindt kept the motorway scandal secret for years. In: berliner-zeitung.de. September 1, 2017, accessed September 1, 2017 .
- Volker Schaedel: Public Private Partnership as a strategic business area for medium-sized construction companies. P. 41.
- Martin Henze: Public Private Partnership; Modern forms of cooperation and strategy concepts for clinics, Kulmbach. 2nd Edition. Baumbach Fachverlage, 2009, ISBN 978-3-938610-74-9 ; Hans Wilhelm Alfen, Susanne Cordes, Volker Schaedel, Philipp Güther: PPP in Germany: 2000–2010. Business Symposium - Construction, Volume 9; Series of publications by the Professorship of Business Administration in Building ( Memento from May 13, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), 9; Publishing house of the Bauhaus University Weimar, 2010, ISBN 978-3-86068-407-8 .
- Website of the Business Symposium Construction ( Memento from December 10, 2008 in the Internet Archive )
- ÖPP Deutschland AG ( Memento from December 18, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
- The plundered state ( Memento of March 8, 2014 in the Internet Archive ), NDR, 45 minutes.
- Rainer Räch: auxiliary sheriff next year in the city , Plauen newspaper of 26 August of 2010.
- Bundesrechnungshof: Expert opinion on organizational forms and financing options for federal highways , online at bundesrechnungshof.de, accessed on February 11, 2017.
- Werner Rügemer: "Locusts" in public space. Public Private Partnership - Anatomy of a Global Financial Instrument . Bielefeld 2012, p. 122 ff.
- Bund deals with corporations, Berliner Zeitung of October 11, 2013.
- Niederösterreichische Nachrichten , week 18/2010, p. 28.
- bamppp.com: Burgdorf Prison
- CEO of GSK, Strategy Consultants International, see: https://www.linkedin.com/in/martin-henze-1138935