In search for effective public-private partnerships: An assessment of the impact of organizational form and managerial strategies in urban regeneration partnerships using fsQCA
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2016
In search for effective public-private partnerships: An assessment of the impact of organizational form and managerial strategies in urban regeneration partnerships using fsQCA
A public-private partnership (PPP) is an organizational arrangement in which knowledge and resources are pooled in order to realize outcomes. Although PPPs have become common practice in spatial planning and development, there is a continuous search for their ideal organizational form and management. This is fueled by the often poor performance in terms of e.g. time delays and budget overruns. Whilst comparative studies have been conducted into the outcomes of certain organizational forms and management strategies, fewer comparative studies evaluate their combined effects. The goal of this study is to explore what configurations of certain organizational forms and management may produce good outcomes. This is done by conducting a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) of survey data of 50 managers involved in urban regeneration companies (URCs) in the Netherlands.
AgranoffRMcGuireM (2001) “Big questions in public network management research”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory11: 295–326
2.
BensonJK (1982) “A framework for policy analysis”. In: RogersDLWhettenDA (eds) Interorganizational Coordination: Theory, Research, and Implementation, Ames: Iowa State University Press, pp. 137–176
3.
Berg-SchlosserDDe MeurGRihouxBRaginCC (2009) “Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) as an approach”. In: RihouxBRaginCC (eds) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, London: Sage, pp. 1–18
4.
Cooper B, Glaesser J, 2012, “Qualitative work and the testing and development of theory: Lessons from a study combining cross-case and within-case analysis via Ragin's QCA” Forum: Qualitative Social Research 13
5.
DeakinSMichieJ (1997) Contracts, Co-operation, and Competition: Studies in Economics, Management, and Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press
EdelenbosJTeismanGR (2008) “Public-private partnerships on the edge of project and process management: Insights from Dutch practice: The Sijtwende spatial development project”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy26: 614–626
8.
FlyvbjergBBruzeliusNRothengatterW (2003) Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
9.
GageRWMandellMP (1990) Strategies for Managing Intergovernmental Policies and Networks, New York: Preager
10.
GeddesM (2008) “Inter-organizational relationships in local and regional development partnerships”. In: CropperSEbersMHuxhamCSmith RingP (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Inter-Organizational Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 203–230
11.
GhobadianAGallearDO'ReganNVineyH (2004) Public-Private Partnerships: Policy and Experience, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
12.
GrofmanBSchneiderCQ (2009) “An introduction to crisp set QCA with a comparison to binary logistic regression”. Political Research Quarterly62: 662–672
13.
HodgeGAGreveC (2005) The Challenge of Public-Private Partnerships: Learning from International Experience, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
14.
HodgeGAGreveCBoardmanAE (2010) International Handbook on Public-Private Partnerships, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
KeastRMandellM (2014) “A composite theory of leadership and management: Process catalyst and strategic leveraging: Deliberative action in collaborative networks”. In: KeastR.MandellM AgranoffR (eds) Network Theory in the Public Sector: Building New Theoretical Frameworks, New York: Routledge, pp. 33–50
17.
KlijnEH (2010) “Public-private partnerships: Deciphering meaning, message and phenomenon”. In: HodgeGAGreveCBoardmanAE (eds) International Handbook on Public-Private Partnerships, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
18.
KlijnEHEdelenbosJKortMVan TwistM (2006) Management of het Grensvlak van Publiek en Privaat: Hoe Managers Omgaan met Dilemma's in Complexe Ruimtelijke PPS Projecten, Den Haag: Uitgeverij Lemma
19.
KlijnEHSteijnBEdelenbosJ (2010) “The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks”. Public Administration88: 1063–1082
20.
KlijnEHTeismanGR (2003) “Institutional and strategic barriers to public-private partnership: An analysis of Dutch cases”. Public Money & Management23: 137–146
21.
KoppenjanJFMKlijnEH (2004) Managing Uncertainties in Networks: A Network Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making, London: Routledge
22.
KortM (2011) Perspectief op Herstructurering: Een Onderzoek Naar het Belang van Organisatie en Management van de Wijkontwikkelingsmaatschappij, Den Haag: Boom Lemma Uitgevers
23.
KortMKlijnEH (2011) “Public-private partnerships in urban regeneration projects: Organizational form or managerial capacity?”. Public Administration Review71: 618–626
24.
LaneJE (2000) New Public Management: An Introduction, London: Routledge
25.
MandellMP (2001) Getting Results through Collaboration: Networks and Network Structures for Public Policy and Management, Westport: Quarom Books
26.
McGuireMAgranoffR (2011) “The limitations of public management networks”. Public Administration89: 265–284
27.
MeierKJO'TooleLJ (2007) “Modeling public management: Empirical analysis of the management-performance nexus”. Public Management Review9: 503–527
28.
MulfordCLRogersDL (1982) “Definitions and models”. In: RogersDLWhettenDA (eds) Interorganizational Coordination: Theory, Research, and Implementation, Ames: Iowa State University Press, pp. 9–31
29.
NAO National Audit Office (2001) Managing the Relationship to Secure a Successful Partnership in PFI Projects, London: National Audit Office
30.
NegandhiAR (1975) Interorganisation Theory, Kent: Kent State University Press
31.
OsborneDGaeblerT (1992) Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, New York: Penguin Books
32.
OsborneSP (2000) Public-Private Partnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective, New York: Routledge
33.
PfefferJ (1981) Power in Organizations, Boston: Pitman
34.
PierreJ (1997) Partnerships in Urban Governance: European and American Experience, London: Macmillan Press
35.
PollittCTalbotCCaulfieldJSmullenA (2004) Agencies: How Governments do Things through Semi-Autonomous Organizations, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan
36.
ProvanKGHuangHMilwardHB (2009) “The evolution of structural embeddedness and organizational social outcomes in a centrally governed health and human services network”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory19: 873–94
37.
RaginCC (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies, Los Angeles: University of California Press
38.
RaginCC (2000) Fuzzy-Set Social Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
39.
RaginCC (2008a) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
40.
RaginCC (2008b) User's guide to Fuzzy-Set/Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Tuscon: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona
41.
RaginCC (2009) “Qualitative Comparative Analysis using fuzzy sets (fsQCA)”. In: RihouxBRaginCC (eds) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, London: Sage, pp. 87–122
42.
RaginCCDaveyS (2009) Fuzzy-Set/Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Version 2.5 June 2009, Tuscon: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona
43.
RihouxB (2003) “Bridging the gap between the qualitative and quantitative worlds? A retrospective and prospective view on qualitative comparative analysis”. Field Methods15: 351–365
44.
RihouxBRaginCC (2009) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, London: Sage
45.
RihouxBRaginCCYamasakiSBolD (2009) “Conclusions - The way(s) ahead”. In: RihouxBRaginCC (eds) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, London: Sage, pp. 167–178
46.
SavasES (2000) Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships, New York: Seven Bridges Press
47.
SchneiderCQWagemannC (2010) “Standards of good practice in qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and fuzzy sets”. Comparative Sociology9: 397–418
48.
SchneiderCQWagemannC (2012) Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
49.
SkelcherC (2005) “Public-private partnerships and hybridity”. In: FerlieELynnLEJrPollittC (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 347–370
50.
SørensonETorfingJ (2007) Theories of Democratic Network Governance, London: Palgrave Macmillan
51.
SteijnBKlijnEHEdelenbosJ (2011) “Public private partnerships: Added value by organizational form or management?”. Public Administration89: 1235–1252
52.
Urban Task Force (1999) Towards an Urban Renaissance, London: Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO
53.
Van GestelKVoetsJVerhoestK (2012) “How governance of complex PPPs affects performance”. Public Administration Quarterly36: 140–188
54.
VerhoestKPetersBBouckaertGVerschuereB (2004b) “The study of organisational autonomy: A conceptual review”. Public Administration and Development24: 101–118
55.
VerhoestKVerschuereBPetersBGBouckaertG (2004a) “Controlling autonomous public agencies as an indicator of new public management”. Management International9: 25–35
56.
VisB (2009) “Governments und unpopular social policy reform: Biting the bullet or steering clear?”. European Journal of Political Research48: 31–57
57.
VerweijS (2015) “Achieving satisfaction when implementing PPP transportation infrastructure projects: A qualitative comparative analysis of the A15 highway DBFM project” International. Journal of Project Management33: 189–200
58.
VerweijSGerritsLM (2015) “How satisfaction is achieved in the implementation phase of large transportation infrastructure projects: A qualitative comparative analysis into the A2 tunnel project”. Public Works Management & Policy20: 5–28
59.
VerweijSKlijnEHEdelenbosJVan BuurenA (2013) “What makes governance networks work? A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis of 14 Dutch spatial planning projects”. Public Administration91: 1035–1055
60.
VisB (2012) “The comparative advantages of fsQCA and regression analysis for moderately large-N analysis”. Sociological Methods & Research41: 168–198
61.
VROM-Raad (2002) Haasten en Onthaasten in de Stedelijke Herstructurering: Advies over de Herstructurering van Stedelijke Woonmilieus, Den Haag: VROM
62.
WilliamsonOE (1996) The Mechanisms of Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press
