Abstract
Public-private partnership infrastructure projects (PPPIPs) are used globally to mitigate funding deficits for development budgets and provide a positive impact in communities. The provision of well-rounded benefits to communities could be ascertained through an ex-post evaluation during the operation phase. However, ex-post evaluations of PPPIPs are few and biased towards the economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability while neglecting the social dimension, negatively affecting social sustainability The lack of ex-post evaluation hinders the ability to ascertain if a PPPIP has achieved the planned goals and purposes. Similarly, South Africa (SA) has 35 operational PPP projects, however, records of ex-post evaluation were not found. Furthermore, the procedures which could be employed in an ex-post evaluation could not be traced in the PPP framework.
The main aim of the study was to develop a framework for the ex-post evaluation of the social sustainability of PPPIPs in the operation phase. To achieve the objective, the study (1) reviewed the ex-post evaluation of PPPIPs and their contribution to social sustainability; (2) identified social dimensions for the ex-post evaluation of PPPIPs; and (3) developed and validated an ex-post evaluation framework for the social sustainability PPPIPs. To accomplish the objectives an exploratory sequential convergent parallel mixed methods study design was adopted. The identified social dimensions were used to develop a conceptual ex-post evaluation framework which was given to 22 expert participants for weighting and ranking using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The weighting and ranking highlighted the most important elements for the ex-post evaluation of the social sustainability of PPPIPs. The data were analysed using the eigenvector and geometric mean methods. To validate the results, a qualitative inquiry with five expert participants was undertaken and Deductive Content Analysis was used to analyse the insights of the expert participants into the suitability of the framework to enhance its practical use.
The results show that project impacts are more important than engage stakeholders and governance. However, the pairwise comparison indicates that all the elements are important, only that they are weighted and ranked differently. Besides, literature and the qualitative validation supports the necessity of all elements, however, they cannot be
iv
assigned equal effort to avoid ineffectiveness during an ex-post evaluation. Thus, through the weighting and ranking, the elements requiring greater effort were singled out.
Theoretically the findings contribute the weighted and ranked elements which are priorities critical during an ex-post evaluation. Practically, they provide a structured approach to an ex-post evaluation through a framework which indicates the relative importance of each element.
Methodologically, the use of qualitative validation after an AHP study to examine the suitability of the framework offers additional insights into the method because current studies adopt a qualitative inquiry before the AHP study to refine the criteria.
The ex-post evaluation framework is general and specific for South Africa hence, its application to other geographical contexts may be limited. Future research directions should focus on adaptation of the framework to specific infrastructure sectors, and geographical contexts to consider country specific factors in PPP infrastructure projects. Furthermore, the framework was not operationalised on existing PPPIPs. Future research should focus on testing the framework on operational PPPIPs to enhance its practical use and effectiveness. The adoption of the findings by researchers, policy makers and the promoters of PPPIPs, may contribute to policy debates not only in SA but within Africa and beyond.