Building State Infrastructure Privately: The Emergence and Diffusion of Public Private Partnerships in Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States of America by Christian Bordeleau, B.Sc. (Montréal), M. Sc. ((Montréal), A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Public Policy School of Public Policy and Administration Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada April 2014 © Copyright 2014, Christian Bordeleau Abstract This study introduces a new explanation of the creation and expansion of public-private partnerships (PPP’s) in developed countries, using Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom as case studies. While classical accounts of the rise of PPP’s have highlighted the fiscal constraints of states, superior efficiency of PPPs, particular political parties and the long history of governments’ cooperation with the private sector, none of those accounts can explain the emergence of PPPs at a specific time in history and the cross-jurisdictional variation in the timing of the diffusion. Using a policy diffusion perspective, the thesis examines the historical evolution of project finance in the private sector starting in the 1930s in Texas’s oil prospecting venture industry. Taking into account this evolution and the associated evolution of supporting institutions over time helps explain better the specific timing of the birth of PPP’s in the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada. This historical analysis becomes the basis of an integrated model where the private sector is at the core of the first wave of policy diffusion. The private sector, at its core, was composed of accountants, bankers and lawyers forming a coalition of interests as they all had a similar financial interest in seeing an increase in financial deals - what the dissertation dubs the Financial Engineering Sector (FES) as an heuristic - and it was involved in the project finance tool (PF) from its inception in Texas (1930) to the North Sea petroleum exploration (1960s). The FES adapted the PF product over time to industrial sectors other than oil and gas in the 1970s, and its expertise was then available to the Conservative governments of Thatcher, Reagan and Mulroney, among others, for the privatization of ii state assets. The FES is not monolithic, but used here simply as a heuristic for a coalition of interests composed non-exclusively of accountants, bankers and lawyers. Nonetheless, this coalition had a direct interest in the diffusion of PF and, later, PPP: an interest strong enough to finance the creation of PPP organizations dedicated to diffuse ideas about their merits and usefulness to governments and fiscally conservative politicians. In the 1980s the PF tool was for the first time applied in the public sector through PPP's. The public sector, in need of bridges and highways, was seen by the FES as simply another business target, such as telecommunications or mining: working groups were created by the firms to find ways to sell PF to the public sector in the 1970’s and 1980’s. However, as a new mode of combining public services and private investments, the FES needed - for the first time - to demonstrate the legitimacy of PF to sell it as PPP's to both the political class and the public in general. To create those ideas about PPP's, the FES funded the creation of several hubs of diffusion, such as the National Council for Public Private Partnerships (US), the Canadian Council for Public Private Partnerships, and to some extent PartnershipsUK PPP (UK). Those organizations, in turn, lobbied governments - pretending to provide independent expertise - for the enactment of “enabling legislation” and dedicated PPP agencies, all the while diffusing the idea of PPP's in the form of reports, conferences and seminars. In turn, Conservative governments saw PPP's as an opportunity in tune with their rhetoric and pro-market convictions. By the 2000s, governments have established various agencies as requested by various PPP councils and the FES, such as PPP Canada or PartnershipsBC, to incentivize and steer public officials toward PPP's. From the 1930's up to now, the FES has iii continuously expanded the PF product to new sectors, such as schools and hospitals, including many non-infrastructure components of those projects (e.g., nursing, cleaning, maintenance). While conservative governments saw PPP's as an attractive tool - in part by their political conviction and in part following the diffusion of ideas about PPP's -- the tool had been created and sold in the private sector for decades. But politicians became part of this grand coalition of interest, albeit not necessarily only for economic efficiency, but in many case for political efficiency (e.g., inaugurating more projects than one can normally afford is politically attractive). By taking into account the material evolution of project finance and its interplay with the realm of ideas and actors who have converging, but distinct interests, and are working in structurally different environments, this study explains - at a macro level - the diffusion of the phenomenon with more depth, provides a new set of questions for future research, and contributes to a theoretical foundation of the public policy of PPP’s for policy analysts, politicians, and practitioners alike. iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Leslie A. Pal for his continuous support throughout the thesis completion adventure. Prof. Pal gave me access to his knowledge of the field of public policy and administration and particularly of diffusion processes and mechanisms. I have to say that I have written hundreds of emails and sent many dense documents that were returned to me within hours, sometimes minutes… I have felt throughout the journey that my research was important to him and that my success was something he took to heart. I am in debt for all I have received from him and for all the free lunches he provided while we discussed my work and my life. Whether he was in rural Russia or somewhere in Asia he would pick up the phone and work with me on any problems - Ottawa daytime. I am now an emancipated and confident scholar and I feel that Prof. Pal has contributed greatly to this state of affairs. Leslie I owe you for life! My gratitude is extended to Dr. Christopher Stoney who has taken the time to read my project and my several drafts either on the phone, by email or while riding with me for several hours to reach the CPSA’s annual gathering in Waterloo. It feels good to be around Prof. Stoney and I have learned a great deal. Much of my original thinking was influenced by our discussions on the Lansdowne project or his own work and publications which we were discussing around coffees at Mike’s Place on campus. Christopher I owe you! Special thanks to Dr. Ian Lee, a distinguished scholar, who was awarded the Governor General’s medal for his research and engagements. Prof. Lee’s knowledge of the financial sector, and his past experience in the banking industry, benefited my thinking to an extent I can’t describe. While studying the Financial Engineering Sector was solely my idea, Prof. Lee contributed greatly by his generosity and availability to the v refinement of my original propositions; to be sure, he his the kind of person who will invite you for afternoon coffee and cake at his home to discuss your research and inquire about any updates. Ian I owe you! I would like to thank my fiancée Maude Marquis for her support and encouragement. My father Yvon helped me with encouragement and some ‘cash advances’ so as to survive the journey; thank you for your help. Many thanks to my friends for the quality free time I had during those years, which helped me to better enjoy my working time. Special mention to Jenn Hartzog, who has taken some time (i.e., a lot) to read and suggest the removal of some typos; this is a painful exercise (an essential one for a Francophone writing in English) and she has been very enthusiastic about it. My gratitude goes also to the staff at SPPA (Meghan Innes, Mary Au, Nicky Enouy) for all of their work and dedication that I had the chance to witness during my years at the School. If the foremost school in public administration, and the first to have ever delivered a PhD in the field in Canada, is still “l'epicentre” of the best and the brightest, it is because of the staff and their work under the direction of Dr. Susan Phillips. I am proud to be part of the SPPA legacy. vi Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS V TABLE OF CONTENTS VII LIST OF TABLES XII LIST OF FIGURES XIII LIST OF APPENDICES XV LIST OF ACRONYMS 0 CHAPTER 1 - PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS IN A POLICY DIFFUSION PERSPECTIVE 1 1.1 PPPs as a new phenomenon? 1 1.2 Public-private partnerships: what are they exactly? 3 1.3 Why are we seeing PPPs emerge at this particular time in history? 9 1.4 Explaining the phenomenon: the mainstream way 12 1.5 Problems with the previous explanations 25 1.6 Research question 36 1.7 Are PPPs simply a more advanced form of governance for project implementation? 41 1.8 Policy diffusion or where does the ideas about PPPs come from and how they travelled 43 vii 1.9 Material source of policy initiative and diffusion 44 1.10 Limitations and challenges of this historical and comparative study on policy diffusion 46 1.11 Policy diffusion perspective as a way to grasp the phenomenon 47 CHAPTER 2: THE EVOLUTION OF THE FINANCIAL MARKET AND THE RISE OF PROJECT FINANCE 49 1.1 Defining project