Browsing Conference papers by Author "Greve, Carsten"
Now showing items 1-3 of 3
-
The Case of the Executive Master of Public Governance Program in Copenhagen, Denmark: A co-operation between University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business SchoolGreve, Carsten (Frederiksberg, 2011)[More information][Less information]
Abstract: This paper gives an introduction to the Executive Master of Public Governance degree program in Copenhagen, Denmark – a joint effort by University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School aided by Aalborg University. The degree program itself began its first intake of executive students in August 2009. The average age of participants is 45 years. By the summer of 2011, the Copenhagen MPG program had enrolled 500+ public managers from Denmark as executive master students. In order to understand the context of the program, the paper gives an introduction to the background of the establishment of the program which was a result of a government reform – the Quality Reform – agreed and also funded partly by the Danish Parliament in 2008. The second part of the paper describes the organization and purpose of the program. The third part presents the content of the degree program. The paper ends by pointing to some preliminary lessons learned and future directions for the program. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10398/8571 Files in this item: 1
Greve_2011_a.pdf (170.8Kb) -
A Market-Based Alternative to Government?Hodge, Graeme; Greve, Carsten (Frederiksberg, 2011)[More information][Less information]
Abstract: One of the paradoxes of the past few decades has been the continuity and even growth of infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) despite the loud voices of critics and harsh judgments of some academics. Indeed, there is little doubt about the success of PPPs judging on the basis of increasing global interest, the frequency of use in countries such as the United Kingdom or Australia, or by the spectacular delivery of timely new infrastructure. There has been considerable work undertaken to date on the multiple meanings of PPP more generally, on the multiple disciplinary languages spoken by commentators and on the evaluation challenges faced by those interested in assessing PPPs as projects or activities. There has been less work undertaken, however, on the meanings given to how PPP has been judged as ‘successful’ by implementing governments. Indeed, the criteria on which governments might judge PPP as a success story seems to be inherently ambiguous and as politically oriented as it is oriented towards more traditional utilitarian policy goals concerned with project delivery or efficiency. In view of the continuity of PPPs post-GFC, the very nature of ‘PPP success’ needs serious rethinking. This paper explores the notion of ‘success’ for PPP and argues that short of embarrassing and large scale corruption or widespread incompetence, PPP and PPP projects are inevitably judged as ‘successful’ in government. This is not only because the PPP concept itself is so wonderfully amorphous and ambiguous, but because each strand of PPP has multiple goals. Infrastructure PPPs for example, have fifteen or so different goals. The criteria for success are therefore multi-faceted and themselves incorporate the very goals of government itself. It is inevitable that PPPs are seen by government to help create public value as well as private value. The paper uses theories of policy success and evaluation studies to assess how ‘success’ is interpreted. The paper concludes that many of the claims for PPP success and failure are therefore, to an extent, self defining exercises. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10398/8573 Files in this item: 1
Greve_2011_c.pdf (320.9Kb) -
Some Lessons from Scandinavia and AustraliaGreve, Carsten; Hodge, Graeme (Frederiksberg, 2011)[More information][Less information]
Abstract: This paper examines the transparency of public-private partnerships (PPPs). The key question is “How has transparency and accountability been implemented in PPPs?”.PPPs in infrastructure have been presented as enabling synergy and as a major alternative to previous contracting out techniques. These partnerships have most usually involved the preferential use of private finance, highly complex ‘bundled’ infrastructure delivery contract arrangements and new governance and accountability assumptions. Risk management is also particularly important to PPPs. Contracts between the governments and partnering private firms, however, have also been more complex and have not necessarily lead to simple synergy, but to more negotiations and governance structures. One ongoing concern from critics has been the accusation of illegitimacy due to the use by governments of these contracts to hold project information secret, rather than providing details of the deals to citizens. This paper first presents the transparency concept as it relates to modern day infrastructure PPPs. Second, the paper discusses how transparency and PPPs are related, and suggests a typology of transparency based on degree on openness and phases of the PPP process. Third, the paper examines empirical evidence on transparency elements in PPP contracts and governance structures based on two cases from Scandinavia and Australia. Fourth, the paper concludes by observing how different transparency dimensions relate to the different phases in a PPP project, including the important point about the contract institution that defines a PPP. The paper also concludes by suggesting some ways forward to improve transparency in future PPPs to enhance legitimacy. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10398/8572 Files in this item: 1
Greve_2011_b.pdf (209.1Kb)
Now showing items 1-3 of 3