Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Transport Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo Introducing public–private partnerships for metropolitan subways in China: what is the evidence? Martin de Jong a, Mu Rui a, Dominic Stead a,*, Ma Yongchi b, Xi Bao b a b Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 9, 2628BX Delft, The Netherlands Harbin Institute of Technology, People’s Republic of China a r t i c l e i n f o Keywords: Public–private partnerships China Subway construction a b s t r a c t Rapidly growing motorisation has led to high levels of traffic congestion and emissions and has encouraged large Chinese metropolitan areas to invest in subway developments. The financial burden of these projects, however, far exceeds the availability of available public funds. As a consequence, the Chinese government has started to allow local governments with public–private partnerships (PPP) and private finance to supplement the funding deficit. Analysts often claim that countries have to fulfil certain institutional and other pre-conditions before they can make effective use of PPP. In this article, China’s record in meeting those requirements is examined and conclusions are drawn as to where the remaining weaknesses lie. Seven recent PPP projects for subways in five large metropolitan areas in China (Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Chongqing and Harbin) are investigated empirically. Conclusions are drawn concerning China’s current status regarding the use of PPP, the way it has been adapted to China’s financial, institutional and geographical context and the likely prospects for PPP in China in the future. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The massive speed and scale with which economic changes are occurring in China far exceed those anywhere else around the world. China currently has over 40 cities whose population surpass 1 million, and 8 cities with more than 3 million inhabitants (Ai, 2006). Because of large differences in the standards of living between urban and rural areas, the pressure of urbanisation is only bound to increase further in the coming years with huge implications for urban transport demand. Rising income among citizens and a decrease in restrictions imposed on car ownership by the Chinese government have already led to highly problematic levels of traffic congestion and air quality in most key metropolises (Ng and Schipper, 2006; Smyth et al., 2008). National, provincial and local governments around the country have concluded that massive investments are urgently needed. Road capacity should be enhanced at the national, provincial and local levels and the larger cities are in need of Metro Rapid Transit (MRT) to provide viable alternatives to car use. However, public funds to achieve these objectives are limited. Subway systems, often considered the backbone of any metropolitan public transport system, require rapid extension in some of China’s leading cities and development from scratch in others. Like many other Asian countries, China is placing high priority on construction and extension of subway networks in * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Stead). 0966-6923/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.06.013 metropolitan areas (Phang, 2007). In its latest annual report, the Chinese National Development and Reform Committee (2007) estimated that there will be more than 30 cities with MRT construction projects underway in the next 15 years. The necessary investment will surpass 600 billion Yuan (approximately €70 billion). Table 1, which presents the projected investments in urban railways in China in the coming decades, gives an impression of both the high ambition levels of the Chinese governments and the enormous efforts involved to implement these ambitions. The large majority of all transport infrastructure projects in China to date has been primarily financed with national, provincial or local public funds and managed by means of State Owned Enterprises (SOEs). Many of these SOEs have also borrowed money from banks and incurred heavy debts (Hu, 2008; Huang and Chang, 2006). Since there are state guarantees for such loans, those SOEs have always been able to borrow at low rates. They could also incur serious cost overruns without going bankrupt or experiencing great difficulties. Sound finances often mattered less than political pressure and personal friendships. However, criticism of these practices has grown in recent years: SOEs are now often accused of running the complex, large and costly infrastructure projects slowly, and in wasteful, unprofessional ways (Wei, 2004; Wang, 2004a,b; Xu, 2008). It should not be forgotten, however, that 10 cities in China, including some of the largest (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen) have all used this ‘traditional procurement model’ for their first subway lines. Shanghai did so with additional foreign loans, and Guangzhou with additional land rent charges, which is also common in Hong Kong (Tang and Lo, 2008). 302 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 Table 1 Chinese metropolises and their subway projects. Name Date of completion Number of lines Metropolitan areas already having a subway system Beijing 2010 11 2015 15 Shanghai 2012 12 2030 17 Shenzhen 2010 5 2020 13 2030 16 Guangzhou 2010 5 2030 8 Tianjin 2015 9 Nanjing 2015 7 Length (km) Estimated costs (Billion Yuan) 270 561 510 780 154 267 585 130 206 235 263 93.6 268.2 160.0 225.4 68.3 115.3 290.31 40.1 81.6 104.1 132.8 Metropolitan areas with subway lines under construction Xi’an 2009 1 20 2013 2 Shenyang 2009 1 22 2010 2 82 Harbin 2012 1 14 2030 5 143 Chongqing 2013 1 38 11.0 9.5 45.0 8.2 62.2 20.7 Metropolitan areas with subway lines in preparation Kunming To be built in 2009 Qingdao To be built in 2010 Hangzhou To be built in 2009 Note: Changchun, Dalian, Wuhan, Chongqing have light rail systems in place. These are not included in the table, but to some extent perform a substitute function for subways. Sources: http://www.ccmetro.com/, http://www.drc.gov.cn/, http://www.df8.cn/ search.asp, http://www.urbanrail.net. The Future Layout of Subway Networks in Shenzhen, Governmental Issued Document, Subway Construction and Administrative Centre of the Municipal Government of Shenzhen, 2008 (in Chinese). The Construction Layout of Urban Rail Transit System of Shenzhen, Research Centre of Urban Rail Transit System of Shenzhen, 2006 (in Chinese). The Review Report of Construction and Operational Models for Mass Rapid Transit Systems in Beijing, Urban Rail Transit Committee of the Chinese Transportation Association, 2007 (in Mandarin). The concept of public–private partnerships (PPP) was officially embraced by the Chinese government in 2001, when the Chinese National Planning Committee issued the policy note entitled ‘Suggestions to promote and guide private investments’. This policy note recommended the use of incentive mechanisms to attract private capital and extended the domains in which private investment was permitted (Chen, 2003). The set of permitted finance channels was broadened, impartial tax policies were implemented and governmental monitoring and management were improved. In 2002, a follow-up report ‘Suggestions to advance marketisation in civil infrastructure industries’ was released, in which a concession system was introduced (Chen and Qiu, 2005). Since then, these beginnings have been supplemented by other statutes on public bidding, a political framework for Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects in which its reach is extended and legal provisions have been refined (Chen, 2005). Worldwide both positive and negative experiences with novel contracting practices and outsourcing arrangements have been reported (Koppenjan, 2008; Koppenjan and Enserink, 2005; Phang, 2007; Chang et al., 2003). It is a good Asian tradition to systematically gather knowledge from foreign examples and good practices and, subsequently, to implement the most useful lessons at home. The adoption of PPP for transport infrastructure planning and funding in China has been no exception to this rule. But international experts have made it clear that China still has a long way to go for PPP. Compared to early adopter countries now seen as mature and having obtained ‘executional excellence’ (e.g. UK and Australia) and transient ones working on ‘effective governance’ (e.g. Spain, South Korea and Japan), China is in a group of relative latecomers still working on ‘long-term commitment’ to PPP along with countries such as Thailand, Brazil, India, Germany and the US (Guo, 2007). Mature countries are now said to face issues related to perfecting their performance (producing robust business plans, generating an attractive and stable risk allocation, having a transparent and robust tendering process and an effective controlling framework in place). The middle group is working on a robust legal and regulatory framework, clear standards for PPP-models, project selection and evaluation and effective and capable government organisations. China, as a relative laggard, is still in the process of developing a clear vision for the role of PPP in infrastructure delivery, generating a robust and transparent pipeline of viable PPP projects and creating a positive PPP-image. According to Guo, China still has quite along way to go. On the other hand, it can be questioned whether all countries around the world will inevitably follow exactly the same path (Altamirano et al., 2008). When adopting foreign institutions, the latter often merge with domestic pattern of social interaction and acquire a distinct national flavour (de Jong et al., 2002). Incorporation of PPP in China can be anticipated to go through such a process of endogenisation as well. In this paper we examine where China currently stands in the financing schemes of recent subway projects, what the Chinese experiences have been to date, and how PPP has been adopted to fit the specific Chinese circumstances in the case of subway schemes. More specifically, we address the following questions: What are the main motives for introducing public–private partnerships for transport infrastructure in China (Section 2)? What is China’s record and specific national flavour in PPP adoption, seen in terms of five types of pre-conditions for effective PPPs largely taken from the academic literature (Section 3)? How has PPP been used in projects for subway infrastructure projects in China? Here we examine 7 large construction projects in 5 Chinese metropolises (Chongqing, Harbin, Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing), identify motives to choose for subways and adopt PPP and its specific procurement model, describe the main players, events and challenges encountered and evaluate the success of the project in question (Section 4). What can we conclude from the evidence on the seven cases of PPP-application for subway infrastructure in China, in light of the five types of pre-conditions mentioned above? How has the approach been appropriated within the Chinese administrative system and what challenges are ahead (Section 5)? By providing answers to the questions above, the authors hope to contribute to: (1) knowledge regarding the appropriateness of transferring institutional arrangements originating in a typically ‘Western’ or ‘Anglo Saxon’ legal, political and cultural environment to very dissimilar contexts, such as the Chinese one, and (2) insight concerning the conditions for effective and equitable implementation of PPP in the world’s most populous nation is possible, where accommodating the skyrocketing mobilisation in a sustainable manner is in fact of global rather than just national importance. We have based ourselves on relevant literature on the management of public–private partnerships and its application to subway management, leading recent international and Chinese reports, relevant policy and project documentation in Mandarin, and a set of interviews with policy-makers, managers and experts working on subway infrastructure in the five cities under study. 2. Why introduce PPP for transport infrastructure in China? Large transport infrastructure projects such as subway systems require huge amounts of capital. Although some Chinese cities, such as Guangzhou, have decided to continue to rely on traditional M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 public procurement models, many other metropolitan governments have begun to consider alternative forms of funding. This has happened because they lack sufficient financial resources for reducing congestion and developing transport infrastructure investments even though they have been made responsible for these tasks (OECD, 2006). In many cases, local officials believe that only funding from the private sector can fill the immense gap between the limited presence of public resources and rapidly growing sustainable urban infrastructure needs. This is often the dominant motive for adopting PPP for infrastructure projects in developing countries: China is no exception. Generating Value for Money, and boosting competitive pressures in the world of construction, is normally mentioned in official policy documents, but in practice appears only of secondary importance in emerging economies (Phang, 2007). Nonetheless, something may be changing in the hearts and minds of Chinese policy-makers and project managers. In the past, large construction contracts were awarded overthe-counter to partners well-known to the authorities, but often in ways opaque to other parties and the wider public. These long-standing practices led to growing criticism of ineffectiveness, low speed, lack of transparency and even widespread corruption (Mu, 2008). Competition through open tendering in the field of transport infrastructure is seen as a way of dramatically improving performance (Xu, 2008). Developing a legal framework with clear procedures regarding the phases of planning, tendering, design, construction, maintenance and operation of transport infrastructure projects or any public service amenable to PPP is seen as a way of improving transparency and accountability. It is also claimed that it can save tax-payer’s money, create a level playing field among various suppliers, and force large SOEs to operate at market prices by ending their de facto monopolies or cartels in the business (Yusuf et al., 2006). In some countries, such as Spain, Italy and Chile, this has been done by enacting specific full-fledged and detailed PPP-legislation, while other more pragmatic ones such as Britain, Ireland, Norway and Finland have eliminated legal inconsistencies between various pieces of legislation relevant to PPP without an explicit attempt to make encompassing PPP-legislation (Bruzelius, 2005). In principle, China can still choose from both legislative options. The advantage of the first is its clarity and completeness, that of the second its flexibility of use. Using competition to discourage Chinese SOEs from borrowing even larger amounts of capital for yet more new projects and reducing their future debt levels seems a likely scenario. Demand for traffic is growing so fast that, regardless of their cash income from tolls, expected revenue streams will be sufficient in the coming years to safeguard the eventual payback to their creditors. While SOEs are expected to become more disciplined by these institutional changes, market opportunities for segments of the private sector are actually enhanced. Banking, construction, engineering and consultancy skills currently outside of established consortia can deploy more activities in the construction sector than before and acquire skills in new markets. Some observers even go so far as to express the hope that the negotiations preceding good contracts between public and private players will provide strong incentives for both sides to apply more solid quantitative assessments of various project alternatives. More ‘scientific relations’ between governments and private organisations regarding prioritysetting, risk allocation and the sharing of responsibilities, costs, benefits and possible losses and profits could be developed which is expected to curb the number of arbitrary ‘political achievement projects’ where officials push through investment schemes to enhance their visibility at the expense of systematic policy analysis (Wang, 2004a; Duan and Wang, 2006; Li and Zhang, 2006; Yan, 2005; Zhang, 2006; Ma, 2004). The logical implication could be the use of rigorous ex ante cost benefit, cost effectiveness or multi 303 Table 2 State council standards for infrastructure project approval. Regional economic development indicator (GDP) Urban GDP should be more than 100 billion Yuan Regional population size Urban population should be over 3 million Project financing approach Project financing approach should have been established Customer demand Forecasting on project-specific traffic demand in single direction should excess 30 thousand passengers per hour Source: State Council, 2003. criteria analyses and a reduction in politicisation and officials ‘wheeling and dealing’ with each other. It could theoretically also include the use of Public Sector Comparators (PSC) in which the likely costs and benefits of a PPP construction are compared with those likely to arise if the project were done in a fully public mode (Xu, 2008). The realism of this expectation of ‘enhanced rigour’ strongly depends, however, on the institutional requirements set for the decision-making, tendering and selection procedures. If much emphasis is placed on the merits of analytical studies as a basis for project selection and limiting the production of biased information, this effect might indeed occur. For that to occur, incentives (not guarantees) are needed to ensure that most relevant decision-making aspects have been considered, and both public and private players can ensure that the costs, benefits and risks allocated to them will correspond with what they can realistically bear. At the current stage in the evolution of this approach, however, local governments still attach little value to systematic policy analysis, while China’s State Council (central government) assesses funding eligibility for large infrastructure projects according to four other, relatively generic variables (Table 2). Last but not least, there is a strong macro-economic argument to pour substantial amounts of private funding in public projects. The reason for this is, as in several other countries in East Asia, China has comparatively high saving surpluses leaving banks with the luxury problem of how to spend this influx of money wisely and at a high profit. In addition, the growth in mobility and motorisation in China tends to make the economic prospects of investing in this industry markedly better than they would otherwise be. Consequently, if good prospects are offered free of excessive risks from unexpected political intervention or engineering calamities, putting funds into transport infrastructure may be an attractive option for private investors in China. In this comprehensive list of the attractions of PPP financing, it is interesting that the more ideologically framed pro-market arguments utilised elsewhere hardly seem to play a role. Perhaps it is not surprising that need of funding, the wish to promote professional management, enhance transparency and keep costs in check prevail over issues such as rolling back the state or getting consumer prices right. Having a socialist market economy in place is presumably at least as much pragmatism as it is rhetoric. Consequently, Hodge and Greve’s (2005) claim that some governments utilise PPP-speak as an instrument to cloud actual intentions to contract out or privatise public transport services does not hold in China (see also Linder, 1999). 3. Pre-conditions for effective PPPs and the Chinese position PPP has been defined in many different ways (see for example, Koppenjan, 2008; Hodge and Greve, 2005; Grimsey and Lewis, 2002) but there is general agreement that PPP projects involve private parties in the design, construction, maintenance and operation of a public infrastructure on the basis of long-term contracts or arrangements. Some definitions focus mainly on the aspect of 304 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 private finance, while others give it a more comprehensive interpretation in which the division, sharing and management of various tasks at hand are included (Miller and Lessard, 2000; Li et al., 2005; Devapriya, 2006; Pakkala et al., 2007). Hence, PPP as a general concept can be subdivided into many different forms of procurement models. Usually, the sequence in phases on which typologies of procurement models are based are Design (D), Build (B), Maintain (M), Operate (O), Manage (also M) and Rehabilitate (R). Earlier approaches separated all of these phases in different contracts granted to different actors; today it is more common that they are merged into one contract. In addition, several aspects pertinent to contracting or construction that have not been covered under the above terms are sometimes incorporated in the wealth of procurement model acronyms. The main ones are Finance (F), Bid (also B), Develop (also D), Transfer (T), Lease (L), Upgrade (U), Purchase (P) and Own (also O). The rather traditional Design-BidBuild would for instance be abbreviated to the simple acronym DBB, while a well-known more modern procurement model focusing on the entire infrastructure life cycle reads as Build-OperateTransfer (BOT). An arrangement where ownership permanently remains with the private sector would be Build-Operate-Own (BOO), and if it is transferred back to the state after a number of years, it would be Build-Operate-Own-Transfer (BOOT). Fig. 1 summarises the different forms of PPP and their positions on the public–private spectrum. Not all of the above mentioned procurement models are currently being applied in China. The most commonly used forms in China are Build-Transfer (BT), Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) and various forms of joint ventures. What factors make for good PPP projects? According to international organisations, flexibility, technical know-how, risk allocation to those players best able to carry them, market and marketing expertise, transparent book-keeping and fast decisionmaking are believed to be the main contribution the private sector can make to infrastructure development (OECD/ITF, 2007; Harris, 2004; Li et al., 2005; Zhang, 2005; Aziz, 2007). Most available public reports in which the international practice is evaluated explicitly indicate that efficiency in generating ‘Value for Money’ should the main target for using PPP for transport infrastructure projects. The actual use of private finance as such does not necessarily provide a positive contribution to this objective (Virtuosity Consulting, 2005; Bruzelius, 2005; OECD/ITF, 2007; Clifton and Complete Public Participation Traditional Public Contracting Design Build Maintain Passive Public Service Private Provision Investment Government bonds Pubic Provider Duffield, 2006). Rather than seeking this high level objective most governments are simply driven towards applying the PPP concept once public funds have dried up as a short-term political necessity when demand for transport capacity remains high. In many countries, the long-term consequence of such choices may very well be that future generations will carry the financial burden of these investments, grow dependent on commercially-driven private operators and/or that users of public transport will see an increase in their charges. These circumstances will probably not trouble Chinese subway commuters,: their governments do not aim for large-scale privatisation of public transport, do not use personal connections to remain in control of enterprises, do not face the serious budget deficits of some Western counterparts and usually set up subsidy-mechanisms to make up for operator’s deficits to avoid raising user charges and causing public unrest (Boubakri et al., 2008; Wu, 2007; He and Jin, 2001). Against that background the following section uses a wide range of publications on the subject to discern five groups of preconditions for effective PPP projects (although we do not always follow their distinctions) and pinpoint the general Chinese position on each of them. 3.1. Legal and rule-of-law preconditions International reports specify a range of essential institutional conditions that should be met before PPPs can be fruitfully put in place (De Jong and Mu, 2008). It is often in developing countries, which also have the worst record in overrated benefits and project cost overruns, that some of these conditions seem to be lacking (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003). Among these conditions the presence of secure private property legislation, solid anti-collusion and antimonopoly laws and legislation enabling authorities to coherently utilise PPP rank high. In addition, acts obliging both governments and private parties to only proceed to action after economic, technical and environmental assessments have been conducted, crosschecked and improved, are crucial to the quality of decision-making. Underlying these specific preconditions regarding economic legislation, there are general rule-of-law issues to be resolved. If the above laws and acts are not effectively enforced, if effective recourse by private players to the law is not possible, and/or verdicts reach by courts are not executed or followed by administrative bodies, the entire framework mentioned above will also falter Public-Private Partnership Service Contract Management Contract Involvement Degree of Public Sector Lease Joint Ventures Build,Operate Divestiture and Invest Participation Degree of Private Sectors and Corresponding Risks Borne Complete Private Participation Full Divestiture Privatization Rehabilitate- Transfer Rehabilitate Lease- LeaseBuild Build - Build- Design- BuildOperate - Operate- Operate - Upgrade- Build- SPV+BOT Transfer Operate- Own- Build- OwnPassive SPV+BTO Private Transfer Transfer Manage Operate- Operate (BT) Transfer Operate- Finance-Operate Public Service (ROT) (TOT) (ROM) Transfer (LBO) (BOT) Transfer Operate (BOO) Investment Provision (BOOT) (DBFO) (LUOT) Equity Build RehabilitateDebt TransferOperateguarantees Operate Leaseback Grants (BTO) (ROL) Investment Responsibility Government Role Private Enabler Fig. 1. Forms of PPP and degrees of private involvement (Source: Xu, 2008). For reasons of space in the table, BDOT falls under the same heading as BOT (see also Kumaraswamy and Zhang, 2001). M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 (Chow, 2003). In the case of China, the evidence regarding the above institutional preconditions is mixed. New laws to protect private property and safeguard industrial competition have been enacted in recent years, and a review is underway as to whether new legislation to structure public–private partnerships is needed. On the other hand, strong informal personal links between public bodies and representatives of some SOEs or private corporations make the existence of actual level playing fields in the market questionable. For instance, when invited rather than open tendering is used for the selection of contractors, or when the criteria or procedure for selection lack transparency, the odds are that weaker project proposals may be chosen. Allowing for only public bookkeeping and official publication of both selection criteria and all bids made would be a big step to increase openness, reliability and accountability. Moreover, effective recourse to the law is sometimes questionable as long as administrative organs operate at the same hierarchical level as judiciary organs, the former are not obliged to implement court rulings, and as long as all acting judges in courts have to be members of the Chinese Communist Party, and thus subject to the party-line. This makes both independent judgement and effective execution of court decisions problematic (Lieberthal, 2006; Chow, 2003). Individual citizens whose individual interests are harmed by projects and corporations who are unable to ward off unexpected and undesired interventions by governmental agencies in the management practices may suffer the consequences. 3.2. Checks and balances for adequate project appraisal Less often mentioned, but equally important, is the presence of checks and balances among the various players in correcting cost and ridership estimates and the institutionalisation of counterexpertise against the initiators and beneficiaries of projects when bids are evaluated and before contracts are signed. As some players can benefit from artificially low estimates, while the opposite goes for others, checks and balances are the only way to mitigate the presence of systematic bias. What is quite often noted as key to the quality of cost and benefit estimates is the allocation of various types of risks (market, capital market, political, project, technical, etc.) to those actors best able to estimate and deal with them. Since there is very extensive literature on these issues, we do not go deeper into them here. Suffice it to say that the institutionalised use of counter-expertise and the keeping and sanctioning of each player to its estimates and initial promises (within reasonable boundaries) would help to make a giant step forward in the quality and reliability of decision-making and project management. China’s record is meagre on these counts but here it is in good company because very few countries have such preconditions in place. It must be added, however, that the fact that systematic assessment methods and open communication on bids, cost estimates and project relevant information are still in their infancy, make the Chinese practice extra vulnerable. 3.3. Life cycle view Alongside formal institutions, informal behavioural relations among players should co-evolve as experience with the new procurement models grows. In case this lesson has not been picked up from experience gathered in other countries, most players will come to see the value of a life cycle view of transport infrastructure. Even though short contracts (e.g. 3–5 years) add more to the competitive atmosphere among bidders, long-term contracts (usually of 20 years and over) allow contractors to spend comparatively more resources on technical innovation and sustainable solutions. As they feel secure about their stream of resources over the years so they can connect design, construction, maintenance 305 and operations with each other and generate economies of scale. Some claim that the benefits of long comprehensive contracts with reliable and knowledge contractors far exceed those of short specialised contracts (Pakkala et al., 2007). The latter form of contract may lead to a narrow focus on cost-cutting and induce opportunistic behaviour by systematically overlooking relevant activities not explicitly mentioned in the contracts. More generally, lasting commitment and trust between partners is indispensable in realising the symbiosis expected from PPP. Otherwise, both public and private partners will be strongly driven by cost-saving and effort minimisation. The latter conduct often arises when doubtful actions or omissions, from a wider socio-economic perspective, are not illegal and can therefore pass with impunity. Here, China is still at the beginning of the learning curve. Public agencies are sometimes still struggling to find reliable partners, or even struggling to be reliable partners themselves by refraining from infringement in detailed construction matters. In this early stage of the learning curve the choice for many Build-Operate-Transfer style projects (BOT) as a careful start-up of the process of gathering more experience has probably been wise, given painful experiences with broader procurement models utilised in other Asian cities, such as Kuala Lumpur and Bangkok (Phang, 2007). Freedom of contractors to design, construct, maintain and operate independently without outside support, monitoring and infringement require skills and a sense of responsibility that can only grow over time. In most nations where innovative contracting has been tried for some time, explicit efforts were made to formulate definitions and lists of quality demands and requirements through which contractor performance can be better monitored and evaluated (Altamirano et al., 2008). These indicators or requirements were formulated at higher aggregation-levels to prevent public agencies from mingling with technical specifications that were under the responsibility of contractors, while allowing them to maintain an eye on general service quality. Only the most advanced PPP experience, in countries such as Britain and Finland, have utilised these dimensions. 3.4. Intelligence and experience in tendering and administering incentives Another crucial requirement for successful use of PPP, and perhaps even the prevention of a project disaster, is the selection of credible, knowledgeable, experienced and reliable contractors. Intelligent tendering and smart contractor selection often necessitate drawing lessons from other cities/countries and gaining personal experience. The relevance of introducing financial incentives by public authorities in ways that push contractors to deliver fast and keep service quality high across time are important. It is normally considered unwise to start payments before the final infrastructure product has been delivered and available for passenger-use. Alternatively, payments can be made to contractors at regular time intervals based on their actual (and satisfactory) delivery of the required products and services. China’s record on this count is extremely varied, as is reflected in analysis reported in Section 4. More often than not, administering specific incentives in project management depends on circumstances in individual projects rather than the broader approach of a country’s policies. What can be said in general here is that close ties between public and private players involve a serious liability, which is only increased if bids from unknown and doubtful contractors are involved (Mu et al., 2008). 3.5. Market considerations Two market-oriented considerations need to be mentioned here. Firstly, in the more entrepreneurial countries and constituencies, commercial land exploitation around transport links to 306 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 enhance private benefits and reduce public costs has grown in importance and is sometimes vital to making projects financially viable. In China’s immediate surroundings, Hong Kong is considered an extremely valuable breeding ground and source of inspiration for such practices, possibly even a world leader (Shen et al., 2006; Tang and Lo, 2008). Similar ideas are currently being tried on several new subway lines in cities in China. The value of land along newly developed routes has been claimed to increase by an average of 20% in China (Ma and Luo, 2002). As we will see below, this commercialised approach involves opportunities as well as heavy risks especially if commercial gains are diverted into less profitable transport infrastructure construction. Secondly, the margin between private and public interest rates in the capital market should not be excessive. Should that be the case, public borrowing is much cheaper than using private pre-finance, and private investment is unattractive. In China, large amounts of capital are still cheaper and easier to get for the government and SOEs than for private firms, because of public loan guarantees and substantial government and SOE pressure on banks to provide loans without rigorous financial-economic tests. Maintaining that margin will weaken the application and subsequent sophistication of PPP methodologies in China. General description of the context of the project (location, basic data, main events, starting date and current status/end date, phasing) Motives for choosing PPP rather than traditional public funding Players and their positions Organisation and quality of the tendering process, and reasons why the winning consortium of banks, consultants and constructor was selected Costs and benefits, estimated and actual (if available) It should be emphasised here that while most project relevant data have been found, certain details (especially regarding actual costs and benefits and precise procedures followed during tendering processes) were impossible to lay our hands on in some cases. However, we feel that these omissions have little impact on the conclusions that are drawn. 4.1. 1st subway line in Chongqing The first subway line in Chongqing has been under preparation for more than 60 years, and is currently under construction (Fig. 1). It will be 36 km long and the total estimated project costs are of 12.5 billion Yuan (actual project costs are still unknown, since the project has not been finished yet). The project is divided into two phases: the first from Chaotianmen to Shapingba (to be completed in 2011) and the second from Shapingba to the University Town (to be completed in 2013) (Chongqing Metro, 2007). Traffic congestion has been the main driving force behind developing a metro network consisting of seven lines: one subway line, five light rail lines and a circle light rail connection, to connect the three different areas of Chongqing (Fig. 2). For the subway line, the main objective was to create an intermodal network by connecting two bridges, Longtoushi Station and Jiangbei airport. In addition, the line provides a connection to Chongqing University Town where universities are located. This project was approved by the central government in 1992 and in the same year the Chongqing government signed a BOT contract with the private Hong Kong construction firm Baohua. The selection was not based on competitive tendering, since very few enterprises then had the capacity to construct the required tunnels. The Chongqing government chose PPP due to fiscal pressures and the wish to transfer project risks to a private player. 4. China’s record in using PPP for subway infrastructure In this section, we will report on the evidence we have collected from seven subway PPP projects in five metropolitan areas, while keeping the five groups of preconditions (in Section 3) in the back of our minds. The cases are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Line 1 in Chongqing (BOT) Line 1 in Harbin (BOT) Extension of Line 4 in Shenzhen (BDOT, 5+30 years) Line 3 in Shanghai (Joint venture + SPV) The Olympic Games lateral in Beijing (BT, 3 years) Line 4 in Beijing (Joint Venture + SPV, 30 years) Line 5 in Beijing (Joint Venture + SPV intended, public finance with service contract for 25 years realised) For each of the seven projects, we will provide a narrative containing following aspects: Beiqiao To Airport YuBei District YuZui College city Changjiang river Jal in Case Study 1: Chongqing Line 1 ri v JangBei District er Chaotianmen Changshengqiao Shapingba District NangAn District Notes: Chongqing subway plan Jioulongpo District ---line 1 is our case Dadukou ---line 2 is in operation ---other lines are under construction or planned BaNang District lines 1 3 5 Circle line To Jiangjin Yudong Fig. 2. The Chongqing Metro Plan. 2 4 6 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 Building tunnels was seen as a big challenge because of its technical complexities (Wang, 2008). In 1997, this BOT contract was terminated when a serious problem arose around the constructor’s capital structure. In addition, the Chinese regulatory framework was still insufficiently developed to assess the arguments brought forward by the constructor during the building activities. Baohua felt insecure during the renegotiations and lacking in legal protection. It decided to withdraw and left the project unfinished. Ten years later, in 2007, after a new feasibility study, the central government approved work to complete the project. Again, a BOT contract was signed, but this time the selected partner was the Chongqing Metro Group (CMG), a state-owned enterprise. Some 20% of the project costs is borne by the Chongqing government and the remaining 80% by CMG. The government receives income from road tax (about 0.3 billion Yuan), the auctioning of the right to develop real estate around transfer stations (3 km2 for approximately 2 billion Yuan) and the issuance of bonds (0.2 bilion Yuan). The private investment share is obtained from the constructor itself (2.5 billion), deals with small subcontractors (3.75 billion) and bank loans (6.25 billion). Most recently, the estimated project costs have increased by 3 billion Yuan. The initial design included a 3 km line on ground level, but complaints regarding noise disturbance led to a decision to use underground construction (China Tunnel, 2008). This adjustment led to an increase in project costs and implied a re-negotiation between the Chongqing government and CMG on how to share the additional financial burden. Eventually it was agreed that the government would assume the extra costs, since it was the government that initiated the changes in the contract to serve the public interest. Apart from this cost increase, the partnership so far appears quite successful. 307 If renegotiations are needed, they are likely to proceed more smoothly with public enterprises even if satisfactory legal provisions are absent. They enjoy higher confidence and trust among governments, and they normally have enough financial clout to engage in such projects, relegating private players to a role of subcontractors. 4.2. 1st subway line in Harbin The plans for a subway system in Harbin date from the late 1970s, and make use of a number of tunnels built for military operations. The initial 1979 plan consisted of a circular subway connection (line 3) and four metro links (Fig. 3). A total length of 143 km was planned, requiring a total investment of 80 billion Yuan. This amount, however, proved an insurmountable hurdle. The programme failed to gain approval from central government after repeated efforts by the Harbin government from 1998 until 2004, because it did not meet the State Council standards mentioned in Table 2 (see above). Finally, in 2005, the project was at last approved and design activities have now begun. The main drivers behind the investment scheme were to combat Harbin’s growing congestion problems, to attempt to apply some innovative financial constructions and to developing seamless transfer between different transport modes (Zhan et al., 2002; Liu, 2008; Harbin Government, 2008a,b). Since the Harbin government needed to collect 38.4 billion Yuan for the subway line alone, it had to rely on private finance and an extensive transfer of risks to private players. In 2005, a BOT contract was signed with the Harbin Institute of Technology Group (HITG) after a closed invitation. How- Fig. 3. The Harbin Metro Plan. 308 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 ever, HITG did not succeed in raising the money either through subcontracting or by means of bank loans and terminated the contract in 2006. The Harbin Subway Corporation (HSC), a public enterprise founded in 2008 specifically for building the first subway line, was the second candidate. This player, like the first, was chosen through a closed invitation. Although HSC held several talks with the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBI) and the China Development Bank (CDB), a critical mass of loans could not be confirmed. This second stalemate has temporarily ended the construction activities, although the contract has not (yet) been terminated. Although it may be claimed that the absence of a qualification and open tendering process made the assessment of constructors’ investment and technical capacities a sham, it should also be noted that few outside investors and constructors seem interested in investing in public transport in Harbin. It is the capital of Heilongjiang, which is known as one of the provinces with the highest corruption rates in China (Pei, 2006), where many key politicians and civil servant, including a former governor, vice-governor, ten mayors and vice-mayors, a number court officials and the president of HITG have been removed from their posts (Mark, 2005; Gao, 2006). One can imagine that it is hard to convince banks and constructors to invest or involve themselves in such an environment. The lack of interest among banks and contractors in the Harbin metro plan does not imply, however, that there are no qualified bidders available in China. It has been suggested that socalled ‘bundling operations’, where private players are granted the right of commercial property management along subway lines (operation of commercial, industrial and residential estates), the profits from which can benefit infrastructure construction, may be a way forward. This arrangement was attempted in Shenzhen (see below). 4.3. Extension of the 4th subway line in Shenzhen Shenzhen already has two subway lines in place: line 1 and the first part of line 4, which together extend almost 22 km and have cost approximately 11.6 billion Yuan. These had been funded through traditional channels with 70% of the project expenditure coming from the Shenzhen government and 30% from bank loans obtained by the same government. However, given rapid increases in car traffic in the city (with 800 extra cars on the road each day leading to a doubling of car ownership every 2–3 years) and the goal of traffic congestion mitigation along the North–South axis and with Hong Kong, the long-term plans of the Shenzhen govern- ment are far more ambitious. A complete network totalling 365 km and requiring over 100 billion Yuan are envisaged (Fig. 4), which makes reliance on private finance essential. The Shenzhen government decided to develop the second phase of line 4, running from Shaoniangong (the point connecting the first phase of the 4th line) to Qinghu in Northern Shenzhen. It is 16 km in length and the estimated project cost is 5.9 billion Yuan. A Build-Develop-Operate-Transfer (BDOT) procurement model is being used in which private players subsidise both the construction and operations from profits obtained in real estate management, freeing the government from the duty to subsidise public transport. After a competitive tendering process held in 2003 and a subsequent qualification assessment in 2004, the Hong Kong Metro Traffic Corporation Ltd (MTR) won the contract. MTR’s 30-year experience in operating Hong Kong subways had been a major factor in its successful tender. The signed contract defines a 5-year construction period and gives MTR 30-year rights to operate the line. Under the agreement, the Shenzhen government is responsible for acquiring land and selling it for 60% of its estimated market value to MTR, while MTR assumes the tasks of financing, constructing and operating the subway line at agreed user fees charged. MTR was also granted the rights to develop 2.9 million m2 of real estate along the subway line. The money earned from real estate development will be used for subway construction and operation, while the Shenzhen government will monitor MTR’s performance. Although the schedule indicated that construction activities were to take place from 2004 to 2008 and be completed at the end of this time, large-scale construction had not yet even begun in 2009. To date, MTR has earned profits from the development of real estate but has not yet put this money into subway construction, which has been postponed time and again. As such, the project cannot be regarded as a success story (Zhuang and Wang, 2008). Public debate in Shenzhen has flared up as to why MTR is not complying with the contract and why government monitoring of their activities has been absent or ineffective. 4.4. 3rd subway line in Shanghai Shanghai’s third metro line, known as the ‘Pearl Line’, is an elevated light rail connection unlike most of the lines in the Shanghai metro system. It is part of an extensive network in the metropolis and is 25 km long, running from Jiangyan Road in the North of the city to Shanghai South Station (Sun, 2006). The main goal was to improve North–South traffic and it was completed in 2000 Fig. 4. The Shenzhen metro plan. 309 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 Case Study 4: Shanghai Line 3 Jiang Yang Road (North) Fujin Road Line 3 Line 1 Gang Cheng Road Line 8 Line 6 Shiguang Road Line 4 People’s Square Line 2 Zhangjiang Hi-Te Park Songhong Road Guilin Road Long Yang Road maglev Line 3 Xin Zhuang Shanghai south railway station Linyang Road (south) Pudong Int'l Airport Line 9 Song Jiang Xin Cheng Fig. 5. The Shanghai Metro Plan. (Fig. 5). Like all previous projects and the other subway lines in Shanghai, it was intended to counter rapidly growing motorisation and road congestion, especially since lines 1 and 2 did not then exist. Before construction, its estimated costs had been of 9 billion Yuan. The eventual project costs have never been published. The average daily ridership in 2006 has been established at 346,000 passengers and was expected to climb further to 1.5 million in the years after that (Shanghai Metro Traffic Design Institute, 2006). Shanghai’s official approach is to separate investment, construction, operation and monitoring activities from each other. Moreover, the Pearl Line is not a PPP in the conventional sense, since all players are publicly owned. For investment activities in this Public–Public Partnership, the Shentong Group was established by the Shanghai government in 2001 with the sole aim to facilitate the financing of the Shanghai metro system (Shentong is a socalled Special Project Vehicle or SPV).1 The main reason for setting up an SPV was to separate the project-specific risks and those of the investment enterprises themselves. Enterprises investing in large infrastructure projects are released from debt liabilities if construction or operation activities fail. This form of public guarantee appeared to be sufficient incentive to move the project forward and complete it within a reasonable time-span. Shentong acted as a concessionaire on behalf of the Shanghai government collecting funds mainly through public finance, bank loans, issuing (tradable) stocks and bonds and reactivating existing assets. After a bidding process, the Shanghai government identified another public player, the Shanghai Railway Bureau Corporation, as having the ability to design and construct the line. The financial arrangements were such that the Shentong Group contributed 1.37 billion Yuan, the Shanghai Railway Bureau Corporation 1.33 billion, while 1.8 billion was bor- 1 A special purpose vehicle (SPV), otherwise known as a special purpose entity (SPE), is a legal entity (usually a limited company of some type or a limited partnership) created to fulfill narrow, specific or temporary objectives. SPVs are typically used by companies to isolate a firm from financial risk. A company will transfer assets to the SPV to finance a large project thereby achieving a narrow set of goals without putting the entire firm at risk. rowed from foreign banks and 4.5 billion from domestic banks. For the operation of the line, two other players were invited to tender: the Shanghai-based Modern Rail Transit Group and the Shanghai Subway Operations Company. Monitoring is the responsibility of the Shanghai government itself. By means of performance-based pay mechanisms, they are able to reward operators for good performance and sanction them for low quality services. Shanghai’s 3rd subway line can generally be regarded as a solid, innovative project, where time schedules were met and the quality of construction and operation tasks have been largely sufficient. Precise information on costs could not be obtained however. 4.5. Olympic Games subway lateral in Beijing The Olympic lateral is the only subway line directly connected to the Olympic Area, running 6 km from Beitucheng to the Forest Park, passing through the Olympic Sports Centre and Olympic Green. The entire stretch is underground and project costs were estimated at 1.43 billion Yuan before construction, whereas the actual eventual project costs were 1.09 billion: a saving of 0.34 billion (China Transportation Technology, 2008). The construction process started June 2005 and was finished in April 2008, on time for the Beijing Olympics. In 2008, daily ridership had reached 5.35 million passengers (Xinhua News Agency, 2008a). The Beijing Olympic Games subway lateral is part of the long-term plan of the 8th subway line (Fig. 6). Building the 8th subway line ahead of schedule as an Olympic subway lateral was justified by the expected increase of traffic demand during the Olympic Games and the desire to improve the accessibility of the Olympic Area by building links to other existing subway lines. During the Games, this lateral only served athletes and spectators (Jinghua Times, 2008). In this project, only the responsibility for construction activities was transferred to a private player, since the lateral is just a short section of the entire 8th subway line, which is still in the planning phase. The operating right is to be reserved for the operator that will run the complete 8th subway in the future (Wang and Ma, 2008; Wu, 2008; Li, 2006). According to a Build-Transfer (BT) 310 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 Fig. 6. The Beijing Metro Plan. arrangement, the constructor was selected through international competitive tendering. The Beijing government organised, assessed, and chose the contractor, which was to be responsible for both project financing and construction, although the Beijing government assisted in borrowing process by acting as a warrantor. Three public-owned enterprises, China Railway Engineering Corporation (CREC), China CREC Railway Electrification Bureau Group and China Railway No. 3 Engineering Group Corporation Ltd constituted the ‘Olympic Lateral Project Company’ and won the bid. After project completion, the Beijing government purchased the project by paying a lump sum to the contractor after thorough quality inspection. This BT project can be considered successful according to many criteria. Quality evaluation, eventual project costs and time schedule, all were favourable. A few reasons stand out (inspired by Zhang, 2005): Both national and local governments actively monitored project progress, since failure was out of the question in this case. Competitive tendering ensured the qualification of the most qualified contractor and drove prices down. Post-project payment as it was agreed here provided incentives for the contractor not to behave strategically and take project quality and schedule seriously. BT employed a short time horizon and reduced the risk of contract termination. BT allowed for a higher percentage of bank loans in the total project funding. This reduces taxation levels imposed on enterprises, because taxes were paid after loans are returned to banks. The contractor enjoyed favourable conditions when applying for bank loans due to the government’s guarantees. The teaming up of enterprises in one consortium reduced project risks. 4.6. 4th subway line in Beijing Beijing’s 4th subway line will run from from Anheqiao North to Gongyixiqiao South and will have a length of 28 km (Fig. 6). Connecting the Xidan shopping centre, Beijing’s University Town, Beijing South Station and the Media Market (in Zhongguancun), all congested areas along a North–South axis in Western Beijing, were the main targets (Xinhua News Agency, 2009; China Invest, 2007). Project investment costs have been estimated at 15.3 billion Yuan, while final figures cannot be given yet since the link was not completed at the time of writing (early 2009). Preparation began in 2004 and the project should be completed by September 2009 (Beijing News, 2008). Fiscal pressures drove the Beijing government to embrace the idea of setting up a joint venture structure, the main advantage of which is that long-term subsidies to the subway operator will not be necessary (Chai, 2006). Three private M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 players won the contract after a competitive tendering process to which only a small selection of pre-qualified bidders were invited. These three enterprises were the Hong Kong Metro Traffic Corporation Ltd. (MTR), the Beijing Infrastructure Investment Corporation Ltd. (BIIC), and the Beijing Career Group (BCG) (China News, 2006; People Daily, 2006). The signed contract covers a period of 30 years, of which the first few are reserved for construction activities and the rest for operations. During the construction phase the hard infrastructure (earthwork, tunnels and stations, representing 70% of the expenses) are being paid for by the Beijing government, while other equipment (vehicles, ticket-machines, signalling systems, air-conditioning, fire-protection, escalators, elevators, control devices and power supply facilities, representing the other 30%) will be privately funded and managed by an SPV, in which MTR holds 49% of the shares, BIIC 49% and BCG 2% and function as partners in a regular BOT project. While all three private players are involved in construction, operations will be undertaken by MTR. At the operation stage, BIIC will monitor asset, quality and safety management. Should the SPV make excess profits, BIIC will act on Beijing’s behalf and appropriate some of the revenue. Conversely, should the agreed ticket prices and actual ridership be substantially lower than expected, BIIC will take compensatory measures for the other partners in the SPV. The subway line will to be transferred back to the Beijing government by the year 2039 (MRT, 2007). It is still premature to speak of success or failure in this project, but construction costs, schedule and quality have received positive appraisals to date (Beijing Government, 2009). 4.7. 5th subway line in Beijing Beijing 5th metro line is a stretch of 28 km from Songjiazhuang to Taipingzhuang, 17 km of which run underground (Fig. 6). The main motivation of this project was the need for a direct and fast North–South link through Central Beijing to relieve congestion and also absorb a certain amount of passengers during the Olympic Games in 2008 (Xinhua News Agency, 2008b). Construction started in December 2002 and was completed in October 2007 (Beijing Morning Paper, 2001). The estimated investment costs were 12.3 billion Yuan, 15% of which was used for acquiring land. Actual project costs have never been published and the financing process has been full of twists and turns. In 2001, the Beijing government organised an international competitive tender calling on domestic as well as foreign investors to participate (Beijing Evening Paper, 2001). SNC-Lavalin, a Canadian corporation, and three domestic enterprises, the Beijing state-owned Asset Management Corporation Ltd., the Capital Group, and the Beijing Mass Transit Railway Operation Corporation Ltd., won the contract and attempted to set up a joint venture: Beijing 5th Subway Investment Corporation. As in some of the previous cases, this SPV was aimed to limit financial risks for the participants. The contract to be signed between this project company and the Beijing government was to be a BOT with operating rights extending for a period of 25 years. During the negotiations before the contract was officially signed, two different subsidy proposals were brought forward by both the government and SNC-Lavalin to ensure both affordable ticket prices for passengers and acceptable profit levels for the partners in the SPV. Subsidy proposal I was proposed by the Beijing government, and entailed the Beijing government providing yearly subsidies for the project company during its 25-year operation, based on the gap between the agreed ticket prices before operation began and the later actual ticket price. Proposal I was turned down by SNC-Lavalin. It made a counterproposal II with the argument that the Beijing government should pre-pay the full subsidy to the SPV based on the ridership forecasts. Moreover, SNC-Lavalin proposed that the construction work (including acquiring land and 311 digging tunnels) should first be completed by the government, while the SPV would be responsible for investing in the railwaytracks, vehicles and other service facilities. Before the SPV was officially set up, the government orally agreed to the second proposal and started construction activities using public funds. However, in late 2001 the Capital Group withdrew from the project for lack of faith in its profitability so that the SPV was never established. Although construction continued, SNCLavalin’s excitement was much reduced after renegotiations with other partners failed repeatedly. It ended up leaving the project altogether. Interestingly, in 2002 when construction was nearly completed, the finance issue was resolved with loans from China Construction Bank (CCB) and HSBC, a British bank (China Industrial and Business Paper, 2006). One of the three domestic enterprises, the Beijing Mass Transit Railway Operation Corporation, returned to the negotiation table and the operating rights of the 5th line were transferred to it with a ‘service contract’, without competitive tendering. The end result is that the project was completed on time, construction and service quality are above standard and that public funding (partly derived from public loans) rather than private finance paid for this project. 5. Analysis and discussion To answer the question how China has adopted and further developed PPP for subways, it is important to realise that there are substantial regional differences in China. As the cases above have shown, the largest metropolitan areas near the Eastern coast (Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen) can be called ‘developed’ in PPP management by any standard as their use of the PPP has been largely professional and successful. The Chongqing and Harbin cases show a mixed picture to say the least, where the lack of critical mass in the construction industry, lack of competition and overthe-counter granting of contracts between political and business friends are far from unusual. But more can be said than this general statement. First of all, the difference between public and private players is often not so obvious in the Chinese context. Chinese PPPs may have a private legal form and public shareholders, but their managers remain closely in touch with their political counterparts. They enjoy favourable conditions for obtaining loans from banks (due to public warrants and personal connections). If they run into debt they can generally expect financial help from their government relations to keep their activities going. However perverse some Western observers might find this, it is what gives some of the public enterprises in the seven cases under study in this article a better record than many of the ‘really’ private enterprises who lack many of these assets. In fact, we could even claim that many of the PPPs described should even be called Public–Public Partnerships (i.e. not a true public–private partnership) and that in terms of their performance in the high-tech field of subway construction and operations they perform at least, as if not more, favourably than public–private partnerships elsewhere in the world. Although some private players appeared on the scene with good intentions, others have been driven by short-term profit, such as the Hong Kong enterprise in the Shenzhen case, where government incentives failed to force the transfer of profits from real estate development to infrastructure development. A more commercial approach to infrastructure development is fully in line with the rich experience that Hong Kong brings to bear to mainland projects, but the incentives and monitoring activities have to be taken seriously. More generally, it should be noted that devising clever incentives to push contractors towards certain behaviour deserves more attention in these projects than it sometimes has received. The Shanghai case appears to be a good example on this count. Connivance between government officials and contractors has advanta- 312 M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 ges, but it also comes at a price. In most cases, transparent information on issues in the contracts and real project costs and benefits is hard, if not impossible to obtain. Furthermore, open tendering, accompanied by a solid pre-qualification process, is sometimes left aside for choices made in favour of contactors based on untraceable criteria. In the worst cases, there is the odour of fraud and corruption. Hence, the institutional framework for using PPP in China has not yet been completed. The absence of legal safeguards has driven private players away from serious commitment to mega-projects in China, although the situation has improved in the past few years. Nevertheless, state-owned enterprises enjoy a major advantage here, because public shareholders and personal networks make legal security less crucial. In addition, the presence of legal frameworks enacted in Beijing do not necessarily mean the same rules apply to all provincial and local governments. Enforcement has been and remains a major issue in the Chinese administration, and one that private players have to reckon with. This is especially true when the central government is not actively involved and looking over the shoulder of local government. The choice of public or private origins of project funding seems not to be the key issue. Often the choice for private finance was made because the municipal purse was not big enough to afford infrastructure projects of this size. But it appears that public finance ends up doing the job if private finance is not forthcoming, as in the case of Beijing’s 5th subway line, or that governments can safely choose to let a large share of the funds come from the local budget, as happened with Beijing’s 4th subway line. Either way, private finance did not as such seem preferable over public finance. Other typical aspects of Chinese administrative culture are also likely to persist and colour the way in which PPP is further developed. Guanxi (‘personal networks’), which can both oil decision processes making policy and management more flexible and cause fraud and lack of open communication, is one of them (see for example Friedmann, 2005). But if the case studies on PPP for subways in China have demonstrated anything in particular, it is that they provide some checks on the power of overly influential personal networks. In essence, modernisation ties China to global norms of transparency and accountability. Acknowledgements This paper is based on a study funded by the Dutch government through the Habiforum Innovative Land Use Program, the Next Generations Infrastructure Foundation and Delft University of Technology through the Delft Research Centre for Sustainable Urban Areas. The authors would like to thank our interviewees in China for their help in preparing the paper and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. References Ai, Ya, 2006. The prospect for PPP: Feng Guiting and Zhao Xiaoyu, Officials of the Ministry of Finance’s Answering the Reporter from ’International Finance’. People’s Daily Newspaper. July 21 (in Chinese). Altamirano, M.A., Herder, P.M., de Jong, M.J., 2008. Road roles, using gaming simulation as decision technique for future asset management practices. In: Hing, Geok-Soon (Ed.), Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 12–15 October 2008. IEEE, Beijing, China, pp. 2297–2302. ISBN: 978-1-4244-2384-2. Aziz, A.M.A., 2007. Successful delivery of public–private partnerships for infrastructure development. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management – ASCE 133, 918–931. Beijing Evening Paper, 2001. The Beijing’s 5th subway line absorbs foreign direct investment: contractors are selected through market mechanisms. News. Beijing Evening Paper Publishing, Beijing. <http://www.eveningpost.com.cn> (in Chinese). Beijing Government, 2009. The 4th subway line is ready to run in September 2009. News. Beijing Government Publishing, Beijing. <http://zhengwu.beijing.gov.cn/ bmfu/bmts/t1020777.htm> (in Chinese). Beijing Morning Paper, 2001. Construction of the Beijing’s 5th subway line is expected to start. News. Beijing Morning Paper Publishing, Beijing. <http:// www.morningpost.com.cn/> (in Chinese). Beijing News, 2008. The 4th Subway in Beijing has been Finished with 70% Construction. Beijing News Publishing, Beijing. <http://www.thebeijingnews. com/> (in Chinese). Boubakri, Narjess, Cosset, Jean-Claude, Saffar, Walid, 2008. Political connections of newly privatized firms. Journal of Corporate Finance 14, 654–673. Bruzelius, Nils, 2005. The Impact of Legal/Regulatory Frameworks on Transaction Costs for Private Sector Involvement in Transport Infrastructure Funding. Report to the Joint OECD/CEMT Transport Research Centre, Paris. Chai, Xiaozhong, 2006. Building effective franchising model for Beijing’s 4th subway line. Construction Enterprise Management 6, 23–24. Chang, M., Menon, M.A., Imura, H., 2003. International experience of public private partnership for urban environmental infrastructure and its application to China. International review for Environmental Strategies 4 (2), 223–248. Chen, Qian, 2003. A new thought for financing of public projects, the cooperative financing schemes of PPP. Sichuan Finance 24 (5), 12–14 (in Chinese). Chen, Liuqin, 2005. PPP-a new public and private cooperative scheme. Construction Economy, China 26 (5), 76–80 (in Chinese). Chen, Feng, Qiu, Xujian, 2005. Discussion on the prospect of applying Lease PPP scheme in Chinese subway systems. Transportation and Economy in Railroad Field 25 (4), 20–21 (in Chinese). China Industrial and Business Paper, 2006. The 5th Subway Line in Beijing is Finished with Project Financing. China Industrial and Business Paper Publishing, Beijing. <http://www.cbt.com.cn/> (in Chinese). China Invest, 2007. Introduction on the PPP in Beijing’s 4th subway line. News. China Invest Publishing, Beijing. <http://www.chnvc.com/> (in Chinese). China News, 2006. Cooperation between Hong Kong and Beijing to build the 4th subway line in Beijing. News. China News Publishing, Beijing. <http:// www.chinanews.com.cn/> (in Chinese). China Transportation Technology, 2008. Case Study on the Olympic Games Subway Lateral. China Transportation Technology Publishing, Suzhou. <http:// www.tranbbs.com/Techarticle/Investment/Techarticle_33499.shtml> (in Chinese). China Tunnel, 2008. Noise pollution in the first phase construction of the first subway in Chongqing. Subway Planning and Construction Series. News. China Tunnel Publishing, Shanghai. <http://www.stec.net/. (in Chinese). Chinese National Development and Reformation Committee, 2007. <http:// www.drc.gov.cn>. Chongqing Metro, 2007. The first subway line in Chongqing starts to construct. News. Chongqing Metro Corporation Ltd., Publishing, Chongqing. <http:// www.cqmetro.cn/zt/yihaoxiandj/1180.htm> (in Chinese). Chow, Daniel C.K., 2003. The Legal System of the People’s Republic of China. Thomson West, Columbus (Ohio). Clifton, Chris, Duffield, Colin, 2006. Improved PFI/PPP service outcomes through the integration of alliance principles. International Journal of Project Management 24, 573–586. De Jong, Martin, Rui, Mu, 2008. Improving the effectiveness of public private partnerships in China. In: Presentation held at the China Planning Network Conference, 19 July 2008, Beijing. Devapriya, K.A.K., 2006. Governance issues in financing public–private partnership organisations in network infrastructure industries. International Journal of Project Management 24, 557–565. Duan, Huaqia, Wang, Rongke, 2006. The comprehensive administration of ‘‘achievement project”. Journal of Anhui Electrical Engineering Professional Technique College 11 (2), 31–35. Flyvbjerg, Bent, Bruzelius, Nils, Rothengatter, Werner, 2003. Mega-projects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition. Cambridge University Press. Friedmann, J., 2005. Globalization and the emerging culture of planning. Progress in Planning 64 (3), 183–234. Gao, Yangze, 2006. The President of Harbin Institute Technology Group is Subjecting to Investigation by Judiciary. XinJing Newspaper. <http://finance.sina.com.cn/ roll/20060808/0936845099.shtml> (in Chinese). Grimsey, Darrin, Lewis, Mervyn, 2002. Evaluating the risks of public private partnerships for infrastructure projects. International Journal of Project Management 20 (2), 107–118. Guo, Evan, 2007. Financing urban transportation and public private partnership in China. In: Presentation Given at the China Planning Network Transport Conference, August 2007, Beijing. <http://chinaplanningnetwork.org/english/ publications.htm>. Harbin Government, 2008a. The Expectations of the First Subway in Harbin. Harbin New Evening Paper Publishing, Harbin. <http://www.harbin.gov.cn/> (in Chinese). Harbin Government, 2008b. Policies for Innovative Project Financing for Harbin Subways. Working Series No.16. Harbin Government Publishing, Harbin Department of Economic Corporation, Harbin. <http://www.hecpb.gov.cn/ news/display.php?id=827> (in Chinese). Harris, S., 2004. Public private partnerships: delivering better infrastructure services. Proc. Conf.: Investment in Infrastructure in Latin America and the Caribbean: Second Generation Issues and Perspectives. Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. He, Ying, Jin, Chenhu, 2001. Discussions on subsidy-mechanisms of urban metro transport. Journal of Urban Metro Transport Research Beijing, China 2, 12–14. Hodge, G., Greve, C., 2005. The Challenge of Public Private Partnerships. Learning from International Experience. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. M. de Jong et al. / Journal of Transport Geography 18 (2010) 301–313 Hu, Chun Lei, 2008. Director of the Urban Rail Layout and Management Department of Shenzhen (interviewed by Xu Shanshan in April 2008). Huang, Bin, Chang, Wangxia, 2006. Research on the funding pattern for urban mass transit projects. Urban Mass Rapid Transit Research (in Chinese). Jinghua Times, 2008. Beijing lateral does not open to ordinary citizens. News. Jinghua Times Publishing, Beijing. <http://www.jinghua.cn> (in Chinese). De Jong, Martin, Konstantinos, Lalenis, Virginie, Mamadouh (Eds.), 2002. The Theory and Practice of Institutional Transplantation; Experiences with the Transfer of Policy Institutions. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Koppenjan, J.F.M., 2008. Public–private partnerships and mega-projects. In: Priemus, H., Flyvbjerg, B., van Wee, B. (Eds.), Decision-making on Megaprojects: Cost-Benefit Analysis, Planning and Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham. Koppenjan, J.F.M., Enserink, B., 2005. International Best Practices in Private Sector Participation and Community-building in Sustainable Urban Infrastructure. Report to the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development, Delft/Stockholm/Beijing. Kumaraswamy, M.M., Zhang, X.Q., 2001. The governmental role in BOT-led infrastructure development. International Journal of Project Management 19 (4), 195–205. Li, Jianjun, 2006. Building Olympic branch line of Beijing subway by the investment of BT model financing. Journal of Urban High-Speed Rail Transit 19(5), 16–19. Li, Dong, Zhang, Chunlai, 2006. The harm of ‘‘achievement projects” in urban constructions. Journal of Hebei Institute of Architectural Engineering 24 (3), 95– 96. Li, Bing, Akintoye, A., Edwards, P.J., Hardcastle, C., 2005. Critical success factors for PPP/PFI projects in the UK construction industry. Construction Management and Economics 23 (5), 459–471. Lieberthal, Kenneth, 2006. Governing China; From Revolution through Reform. W.W. Norton Press, New York. Linder, Stephen, 1999. Coming to terms with the public–private partnership: a grammar of multiple meanings. American Behavioral Scientist 43 (1), 35–51. Liu, Liping, 2008. Study on current transportation conditions of Harbin city and relevant development suggestion. Science–Technology and Management 10 (1), 7–9. <http://caod.oriprobe.com/articles/found.htm?issue=187974>. Ma, Wei, 2004. ‘‘Achievement projects”: reasons and cures. Journal of Xuzhou Education College 19 (3), 5–7. Ma, Zhong, Luo, Xiaomin, 2002. The analysis on financing system and incomes of Hong Kong subways 5 (1), (6–9). Mark, A. de Weaver, 2005. Hidden motives in anti-corruption campaign. China Business. <http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/GJ29Cb05.html>. Miller, Roger, Lessard, Donald, 2000. The strategic management of large engineering projects. Shaping Institutions, Risks and Governance. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA. MRT, 2007. Project Description of Beijing Metro Line 4. <http://www.mtr.com.hk/ eng/projects/china_beijing.html> HK (in English). Mu, Rui, 2008. Public Private Partnerships and the Management Expressways in China: An Agency Theory Approach. Masters Thesis, Faculty of Policy, Technology and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft. Mu, Rui, De Jong, Martin, Ten Heuvelhof, Ernst, 2008. Public-private partnerships for expressways in China: An agency theory approach. Paper presented at the 1st international conference on Next Generation Infrastructures, 26-28 November, Rotterdam. Ng, Wei Shiuen, Schipper, Lee, 2006. China motorization trends; Policy options in a world of transport challenges. Protecting the Climate by Putting Development First. World Resources Institute, Growing the Greenhouse, Washington DC. Chapter 4, pp. 49–61. OECD, 2006. Infrastructure to 2030: Telecom, Land Transport, Water and Electricity. OECD, Paris. OECD/International Transport Forum, 2007. Transport Infrastructure Investment; Options for Efficiency. OECD, Paris. Pakkala, Pekka, Martin, de Jong, Juha, Aijö, 2007. International overview of innovative contracting practices for roads. Tiehallinto/TU-Delft/Ramboll, Helsinki/Delft. Pei, Minxin, 2006. China’s Trapped Transition: The Limits of Development Autocracy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. ISBN: 0-674-02195-9. People Daily, 2006. Hong Kong MTR Corp wins 30-year operation of new Beijing metro line. News. People Daily Publishing, Beijing. <http://english.peopledaily. com.cn/200604/15/eng20060415_258614.html> (in English). Phang, Sock-Yong, 2007. Urban rail transit PPPs: survey and risk assessment of recent strategies. Transport Policy 14 (3), 214–231. 313 Shanghai Metro Traffic Design Institute, 2006. The national first elevated metro line: Introduction on the Shanghai pearl line. Magazine of Urban Metro Traffic Research. <http://web.tongji.edu.cn/ yangdy/mingzhu.htm>. Shen, Li-Yin, Andrew, Platten, Deng, X.P., 2006. The role of public–private partnerships to manage risks in public sector projects in Hong Kong. International Journal of Project Management 24 (7), 587–594. Smyth, Russell, Mishra, Vinod, Qian, Xiaolei, 2008. The Environment and Well-Being in Urban China. Ecological Economics 68 (1/2), 547–555. State Council, 2003. Strengthening the Management of Urban Transport Network Construction (in Chinese). Release by the General Office of the State Council, No. [2003].81. <www.zhongyuan.net.cn/tuijian/law/kuaisulu.doc> (Released 27.09.03). Sun, Jiping, 2006. Research on the reform and development of the rail transportation system in Shanghai. Urban Mass Rail Transit Research 2006 (2), 8–10 (in Chinese). Tang, Siman, Lo, Hong K., 2008. The impact of public transport policy on the viability and sustainability of mass rail transit; The Hong Kong experience. Transportation Research, Part A 42 (4), 563–576. Virtuosity Consulting, 2005. Successful examples of Public–Private Partnerships and Private Sector Involvement in Transport Infrastructure Development. Ottawa, Ontario. Wang, Hao, 2004a. Promoting the Research and Application of the PPP Pattern. Macroeconomic Research No. 1, pp. 46–48 (in Chinese). Wang, Hao, 2004b. The Discussion on the Definition n Classification of PPP. Urban Rapid Transit No. 12, pp. 111–114 (in Chinese). Wang, Xianbo, 2008. Thinking the financing approach in Chongqing rail traffic. Government Transparency Series. Chongqing Government Publishing, Chongqing. <http://www.ddk.gov.cn/list_bumen_view.asp?ArticleID=17998> (in Chinese). Wang, Yaohui, Ma, Rongguo, 2008. Application and analysis of BT model in financing for urban transit. Journal of Railway Engineering Society 25 (1), 104– 107. Wei, Zhu, 2004. The Application of PPP in Urban Mass Transit Constructions. Integrative Transportation No. 10, pp. 16–18 (in Chinese). Wu, Xiaoli, 2007. Discussion of the subsidy-mechanism of urban public transport. Journal of Technology and Economy in Areas of Communications 6 (44). Wu, Jianhua, 2008. Application of BT model in the Olympic extension construction of Beijing subway. Construction Management Modernization 2008 (3), 30–32. ISSN: 1001-019X. <http://caod.oriprobe.com/articles/found.htm?issue= 185557>. Xinhua News Agency, 2008a. Beijing subway system busy during Olympics. Xinhua News Agency Publishing, Windows of China, Beijing. <http://news.xinhuanet. com/english/2008–08/27/content_9723497.htm> (in English). Xinhua News Agency, 2008b. Beijing Olympic Games subway lateral opens to traffic. News. Xinhua News Agency Publishing, Beijing. <http:// news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2008–02/16/content_7613604.htm> (in Chinese). Xinhua News Agency, 2009. The 4th subway line is finished with tunnel construction, going through Beijing from north to south. News. Xinhua News Agency Publishing, Beijing. <http://www.bj.xinhuanet.com/bjpd_sdzx/2009– 02/10/content_15656124.htm> (in Chinese). Xu, Shanshan, 2008. Applying Public–Private-Partnership to Chinese Subway Infrastructures. Masters Thesis, Faculty of Policy, Technology and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft. Yan, Xiangguo, 2005. ‘‘Achievement projects” and countermeasure strategies. Journal of Theory Research 25 (4), 62–65. Yusuf, Shahid, Kaoru, Nabeshima, Dwight, H. Perkins, 2006. Under New Ownership: Privatizing China’s State-owned Enterprises. World Bank/Stanford University Press, Washington/Palo Alto. Zhan, Wei, Sun, Yuqing, Li, Xiaodong, 2002. Analysis on the construction and management of Harbin rail traffic. Proceedings of the 19th Conference on Urban Transport Planning. China Architecture Committee Publishing, Guangzhou. Zhang, X.Q., 2005. Critical success factors for public–private partnerships in infrastructure development. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management-Asce 131 (1), 3–14. Zhang, Wei, 2006. The phenomena of ‘‘achievement projects” from the legal perspective. Journal of National People’s Congress Research 15 (2), 39–41. Zhuang, Yan, Wang, Jingyuan, 2008. Research on the Financing Approach of the 4th Subway Line (phase 2) in Shenzhen. <http://www.studa.net/Constructs/ 081218/10012373.html>.
© Copyright 2024