4.7 Review

A review of the challenges and application of public-private partnership model in Chinese garbage disposal industry

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 230, Issue -, Pages 219-229

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.028

Keywords

Garbage disposal; Public-private partnership; Social investment; Government

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71773106, 71303208]
  2. Center for Research of Regulation & Policy of Zhejiang Province, China [16JDGH126]
  3. Regulation and Public Policy Research Institute of Zhejiang Province

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the rapid development of economy and the increase of population in China, the phenomenon of Garbage Siege has severely damaged the city image of Chinese cities and threatened the inhabitant both in physical and mental health. Garbage disposal has become an urgent matter to deal with for governments at all levels. Since 2013 the central government of China has widely promoted public private partnership (PPP) model to improve the efficiency of garbage disposal services, and the number of garbage disposal PPP projects has also increased. According to the data released by the Ministry of Financial of the People's Republic of China (MOF), a total of 198 projects with 59.1 x 10(boolean AND)9 yuan RMB have already applied the PPP model in garbage disposal industry. This paper introduces the development situation of the PPP model in the garbage disposal industry from the aspects of specific model selection, return mechanism and signing rate. Some possible risks and challenges of the PPP model in the garbage disposal industry are manifested through the case study and data analysis. Finally, a guide and some suggestions are put forward from the financing channels, the government reputation and the applicability of the PPPs. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available