3.8 Article

Public-private partnerships in Tanzanian affordable housing schemes Policy and regulatory issues, pitfalls and solutions

Journal

BUILT ENVIRONMENT PROJECT AND ASSET MANAGEMENT
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages 233-247

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/BEPAM-01-2018-0010

Keywords

Developing countries; Housing; Construction industry; Private sector; Delivery; PPP

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify and rank policy and regulatory framework factors and inherent pitfalls in the delivery of Tanzanian public-private partnerships (PPPs) affordable housing schemes. The strength of interactions between pitfalls is established, with practical solution proposals offered. Design/methodology/approach Primary data were collected from questionnaires administered to 28 Tanzanian stakeholders. Semi-structured interviews with public and private sector respondents then complemented survey findings with proposed solutions. The quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, mean scores, parametric tests and correlation analyses. Directed content analysis was used for the interview transcripts. Findings Results show that current PPP policy and guidelines need further improvement and Tanzania has a PPP policy and clear regulatory framework were rated higher as policy and regulatory factors. In contrast, poor planning skills and analytical capacity, high cost of building materials and inadequate access to housing finance were the critical pitfalls. Most practical solutions were broadly financial in nature, or related to training, project management or PPP-enabling environment. Originality/value The paper provides solutions that can be tailored to international practitioners interested in understanding the effects of PPP policy, regulatory issues and pitfalls on Sub-Saharan Africa and other similar developing economies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available