PPP and incapacity in government

Last week, IIM held a conference on the twin themes of Urban Government and Public Private Partnerships. A lot of different papers from around the world were submitted, and many speakers provided insights on how other countries are trying to innovate in these areas. I’ll put up a link to the the presentations once they’re all compiled, but in the meanwhile I want to draw attention to something that’s been bothering me for a while.

PPPs have typically been taken up to overcome shortages of capacities and funds in government. That is, we begin by saying that something good must be done, and the government has neither the money nor the ability to do this. So we must look for parterns in the private sector to do this. The second thing that is universal about PPPs is the money bit. It is assumed that no one will do these good things except for money, and so we must come up with a model that makes it ‘viable’ for the private sector to be motivated to do them.

There’s nothing wrong with any of this, in principle. But here’s a question worth thinking about – if incapacity in government is the problem, why doesn’t anyone take up a PPP with the objective of building this capacity? Why are we instead conceding so quickly that the government will never be capable of doing the things it cannot do today?

There are four reasons, that I can think of, why we should build capacity within government, and make this a core objective of all PPPs. One, we should eliminate the problem – build capacity within government, so that we are not forced to do things because we lack it. Second, in some cases, transfering government functions to the private sector changes the citizens-expecting-governance relationship into a consumers-getting-service-for-a-price relationship, and I don’t think we’ve fully understood the implications of this.

Third, since both the private and public sectors need each other for overall economic growth, we should not really be allowing capacities in government to diminish endlessly. And fourth, I think that if the government itself took up some of the projects that are now being carried out under PPPs, there would be fewer contentious issues.

One more thing. Profit is important, but I think it’s overblown in some of our conversations. In any society, there is always at least a small group of people who don’t mind putting a lower price on their time and efforts than the market allows, in order to pursue public good objectives. Around the world, scholars in universities and research labs do this all the time. And we can too.

I think it could be quite exciting to put together a research lab to work on solutions to a wide range of social and economic problems. I’d be excited to work at a place like that for a long time, and I have a suspicion many others would too.

Comments:

  1. Divya Harave says:

    Great post.Especially the part about enabling the governments.

  2. Sudhira says:

    I totally agree to your argument. The challenge remains.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

Karnataka SIR 2026: Top FAQs and community concerns addressed

As the SIR is underway and voter forms are distributed, much confusion remains about how to fill them. Here are some FAQs to understand the process.

As of July 8, booth level officers (BLOs) have distributed over 4.57 crore enumeration forms for the mandatory Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Karnataka. Yet despite the 82.45% completion rate, the process has faced widespread criticism and been plagued with problems including BLO burnout, and the Kannada-only forms. If you are still figuring out how to fill the enumeration form, read Part 1 of this series. In this part, you can find answers to some common questions on filling the form, online enumeration, progeny mapping, etc. The SIR process poses specific challenges to transgender and queer communities due to changes…

Similar Story

SIR for Karnataka voters: All you need to know about enumeration 

Voter verification requires linking your 2025 rolls to your 2002 records. Here's how you can fill the forms and register.

Karnataka's Special Intensive Revision (SIR), which began on June 30, requires every voter to complete a fresh verification exercise. The SIR is carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to prepare and revise electoral rolls, and ensure its accuracy. The process especially aims to remove deceased voters and duplicate names in the rolls, including those of  citizens who have migrated and are registered as voters in  multiple places. The election commission announced the process with the aim that ‘no eligible citizen is left out and no ineligible citizen is included in the electoral roll’. In the Special Summary…