Risk allocation in a public–private partnership: a case study of construction and operation of kindergartens in Kazakhstan

In Kazakhstan, a transitional nation in Central Asia, the development of public–private partnerships (PPPs) is at its early stage and increasingly of strategic importance. This case study investigates risk allocation in an ongoing project: the construction and operation of 11 kindergartens in the city of Karaganda in the concession form for 14 years. Drawing on a conceptual framework of effective risk allocation, the study identifies principal PPP risks, provides a critical assessment of how and in what way each partner bears a certain risk, highlights the reasons underpinning risk allocation decisions and delineates the lessons learned. The findings show that the government has effectively transferred most risks to the private sector partner, whilst both partners share the demand risk of childcare services and the project default risk. The strong elements of risk allocation include clear assignment of parties’ responsibilities, streamlined financing schemes and incentives to complete the main project phases on time. However, risk allocation has missed an opportunity to create incentives for service quality improvements and take advantage of economies of scale. The most controversial element of risk allocation, as the study finds, is a revenue stream that an operator is supposed to receive from the provision of services unrelated to childcare, as neither partner is able to mitigate this revenue risk. The article concludes that in the kindergartens’ PPP, the government has achieved almost complete transfer of risks to the private sector partner. However, the costs of transfer are extensive government financial outlays that seriously compromise the PPP value for money.

Strategic management of non-point source pollution from sewage sludge

In the UK, the recycling of sewage sludge to land is expected to double by 2006 but the security of this route is threatened by environmental concerns and health scares. Strategic investment is needed to ensure sustainable and secure sludge recycling outlets. At present, the security of this landbank for sludge recycling is determined by legislation relating to nutrient rather than potentially toxic elements (PTEs) applications to land - especially the environmental risk linked to soil phosphorus (P) saturation. We believe that not all land has an equal risk of contributing nutrients derived from applications to land to receiving waters. We are currently investigating whether it is possible to minimise nutrient loss by applying sludge to land outside Critical Source Areas (CSAs) regardless of soil P Index status. Research is underway to develop a predictive and spatially-sensitive, semi-distributed model of critical thresholds for sludge application that goes beyond traditional 'end-of-pipe" or "edge-of-field" modelling, to include hydrological flow paths and delivery mechanisms to receiving waters from non-point sources at the catchment scale.

A multi-scale framework for strategic management of diffuse pollution

A multi-scale framework for decision support is presented that uses a combination of experiments, models, communication, education and decision support tools to arrive at a realistic strategy to minimise diffuse pollution. Effective partnerships between researchers and stakeholders play a key part in successful implementation of this strategy. The Decision Support Matrix (DSM) is introduced as a set of visualisations that can be used at all scales, both to inform decision making and as a communication tool in stakeholder workshops. A demonstration farm is presented and one of its fields is taken as a case study. Hydrological and nutrient flow path models are used for event based simulation (TOPCAT), catchment scale modelling (INCA) and field scale flow visualisation (TopManage). One of the DSMs; The Phosphorus Export Risk Matrix (PERM) is discussed in detail. The PERM was developed iteratively as a point of discussion in stakeholder workshops, as a decision support and education tool. The resulting interactive PERM contains a set of questions and proposed remediation measures that reflect both expert and local knowledge. Education and visualisation tools such as GIS, risk indicators, TopManage and the PERM are found to be invaluable in communicating improved farming practice to stakeholders. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.