Explore the vast range of titles available.

The last fifteen years have seen Armenia emerge from Soviet rule and a severe economic and energy crisis, both complicated by its newfound political surroundings. The last ten years have seen significant reform and progress in the power sector which, when compared to the progress made by its neighbors, is all the more remarkable. The benefits of reform have not been easily won, however, and Armenia’s success is a tribute to its ability to learn from mistakes and persevere. A combination of improper planning and bad fortune forced the Government of Armenia to go through three separate tenders for its privatization assets. A combination of good planning and good fortune ultimately allowed for what has turned out to be one of the region’s most successful infrastructure privatizations so far.

Public-private partnerships are enjoying a global resurgence in popularity, but there is still much confusion around notions of partnership, what can be learned from our history with partnerships, and what is new about the partnership forms that are in vogue today. Looking at one particular family of public-private partnerships, the long-term infrastructure contract, this article argues that evaluations thus far point to contradictory results regarding their effectiveness. Despite their continuing popularity with governments, greater care is needed to strengthen future evaluations and conduct such assessments away from the policy cheerleaders.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide an evaluation of public sector research in the 1998–2018 period.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses the extant literature of this era to study the theorisation of, and the findings of, public sector research.FindingsThis is a vibrant field of a study in a wide range of study settings and with many interdisciplinary studies. The influence of new public management is pervasive over this period. There are numerous instances of innovations in study settings, in key findings and the approach taken by investigators.Research limitations/implicationsThis is not a comprehensive review of all literature in this period.Practical implicationsThis study also explored the relevance of academic research of this era to policymaking by governments.Originality/valueThis paper offers a distinctive critique of theorisation of public sector accounting research. It reveals the dominant theoretical reference points in use during this period and observes the increasing tendency for theoretical pluralism to investigate complex study settings.

Infrastructure plays a key role in fostering growth and productivity and has been linked to improved earnings, health, and education levels for the poor. Yet Latin America and the Caribbean are currently faced with a dangerous combination of relatively low public and private infrastructure investment. Those investment levels must increase, and it can be done. If Latin American and Caribbean governments are to increase infrastructure investment in politically feasible ways, it is critical that they learn from experience and have an accurate idea of future impacts. This book contributes to this aim by producing what is arguably the most comprehensive privatization impact analysis in the region to date, drawing on an extremely comprehensive dataset.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are growing in popularity as a governing model for delivery of public goods and services. PPPs have existed since the Roman Empire, but their expansion into traditional public projects today raises serious questions about public accountability. This article examines public accountability and its application to government and private firms involved in PPPs. An analytical framework is proposed for assessing the extent to which PPPs provide (or will provide) goods and services consistent with public sector goals of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Six dimensions—risk, costs and benefits, political and social impacts, expertise, collaboration, and performance measurement—are incorporated into a model that assists public managers in improving partnerships' public accountability.

When do public services privatize, and when do they remain in the public's hands? The authors argue that one explanation lies in a counterintuitive coalition: labor and management. Unlike industrial relations in the private sector, those in the public sector are not necessarily antagonistic. When the interests of public sector workers and managers—the latter defined as those with supervisory responsibilities—are aligned, public services are less likely to privatize. Conversely, when the interests of workers and managers are not aligned, privatization is more likely. To test and substantiate this theory, the authors deploy a most-similar systems comparison of three case studies, focusing on efforts to privatize public passenger rail in the United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand at the onset of the privatization era in the 1980s and 1990s. This article hence contributes to the study of state privatization, cross-class coalitions, and public sector reform in affluent economies.

Purpose - This paper aims to examine the importance of the success factors as perceived by the overall respondents. Also, the study intends to identify the differences concerning the importance of the success factors between the public and private sectors.Design methodology approach - A questionnaire survey was used to elicit the perceptions of public and private sectors on the key success factors of a PPP project in Malaysia. In total, 179 usable responses were obtained and analysed using SPSS to rank the importance of the success factors and to examine the differences in the perceptions between the government and the private sector.Findings - The overall results show that \"good governance\", \"commitment of the public and private sectors\", \"favourable legal framework\", \"sound economic policy\" and \"availability of finance market\" are the top five success factors of PPP implementation in Malaysia. Although the rankings of many factors were different between the public and private sectors, there were no significant differences in the perception of the public and private sectors concerning the importance of the success factors except for a few factors.Originality value - This paper highlights not only the important success factors for PPP implementation in Malaysia, but also offers evidence concerning the importance of the factors of the two key parties involved in PPP - the public sector and private sector.

The question of what should determine the boundaries between public and private firms in an advanced capitalist economy is a highly topical one. In this paper I discuss some recent theoretical thinking on this issue. I divide the paper into two parts. First, I make some general remarks about the relationship between the theoretical literature on privatisation and incomplete contracting theories of the firm. Second, I use some of the ideas from this literature to develop a very preliminary model of public-private partnerships.

Energy reforms play an essential role in technological change as they aim to contribute to an open market: costs reduction, competitiveness, and technology development. This article seeks to assess the impact and effect of reforms on the energy sector. The article’s objective is to evaluate the process of deregulation policies and their micro and macroeconomic effects on the energy sector, and specifically on electricity, by analyzing literature related to electricity reforms. Further, the article intends to explore the impacts of deregulation on power pricing, power market, electricity accessibility, innovation, and competitiveness. Another objective of the article is to analyze the role played by various stakeholders in the deregulation policies, including the government, national entities like states, the private sector, and consumers. The article identified ways to improve the economic impacts of deregulation policies in the energy sector. After a systemic review of specialized articles regarding their theoretical approach, results showed a positive relationship between reform and innovation, competitiveness, opening-up of the market, technology, and price changes. Although deregulation measures aimed to reduce the consumers’ electricity cost, the changes in power prices were achievable only in the long-term and not in the short-term. Additionally, government regulators and stakeholders participated in implementing various measures to ensure that deregulation achieved its primary objective of reducing power prices. Such efforts include developing divestiture policies and implementing rate cuts.

Background Global Health has increasingly gained international visibility and prominence. First and foremost, the spread of cross-border infectious disease arouses a great deal of media and public interest, just as it drives research priorities of faculty and academic programmes. At the same time, Global Health has become a major area of philanthropic action. Despite the importance it has acquired over the last two decades, the complex collective term “Global Health” still lacks a uniform use today. Objectives The objective of this paper is to present the existing definitions of Global Health, and analyse their meaning and implications. The paper emphasises that the term “Global Health” goes beyond the territorial meaning of “global”, connects local and global, and refers to an explicitly political concept. Global Health regards health as a rights-based, universal good; it takes into account social inequalities, power asymmetries, the uneven distribution of resources and governance challenges. Thus, it represents the necessary continuance of Public Health in the face of diverse and ubiquitous global challenges. A growing number of international players, however, focus on public-private partnerships and privatisation and tend to promote biomedical reductionism through predominantly technological solutions. Moreover, the predominant Global Health concept reflects the inherited hegemony of the Global North. It takes insufficient account of the global burden of disease, which is mainly characterised by non-communicable conditions, and the underlying social determinants of health. Conclusions Beyond resilience and epidemiological preparedness for preventing cross-border disease threats, Global Health must focus on the social, economic and political determinants of health. Biomedical and technocratic reductionism might be justified in times of acute health crises but entails the risk of selective access to health care. Consistent health-in-all policies are required for ensuring Health for All and sustainably reducing health inequalities within and among countries. Global Health must first and foremost pursue the enforcement of the universal right to health and contribute to overcoming global hegemony.