The present paper discusses the case of the Madrid Nuevo Norte Project (MNNP) in order to examine the relation of this mega-project with the city’s sustainable development. For this reason, the study used a qualitative approach using semi-structural interviews with experts (Madrid’s town hall, Madrid State, and the program management office and other external) that relayed strongly with MNNP. The expert panel requirements are split in six expertise areas: sustainability, urban development, urban planning, government or public affairs, project management or Madrid Nuevo Norte (MNN) key stakeholders. The study highlighted the vital importance of MNNP as a flagship sustainable project for the rest of Europe, that meets sustainability criteria for contributing substantially in the improvement of the quality of life of final users and for the community in general. For instance, it contributes to the regeneration of the city’s degraded area, to the interconnection of an isolated part of the city and public transportation connection, improving the external image of Madrid. Despite of it, there are some challenges that should be carefully managed such as applying sustainable solutions from other cities not properly tailored to Madrid, housing pricing accessibility increase due to the lack of terrain in Madrid and the politization of the project as discussion topic between local parties. In this context, local authorities should give particular emphasis in complying with the principles of sustainability for improving the overall performance of MNNP, ensuring social justice and prosperity for the people of Madrid.

The US Infrastructure Investment and Job Act (IIJA), also commonly referred to as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, passed in 2021, has drawn international attention. It aims to help to rebuild US infrastructure, including transportation networks, broadband, water, power and energy, environmental protection and public works projects. An estimated $1.2 trillion in total funding over ten years will be allocated. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill is the largest funding bill for US infrastructure in the recent history of the United States. This review article will specifically discuss funding allocations for roads and bridges, power and grids, broadband, water infrastructure, airports, environmental protection, ports, Western water infrastructure, electric vehicle charging stations and electric school buses in the new spending of the Infrastructure Investment and Job Act and why these investments are urgently necessary. This article will also briefly discuss the views of think tank experts, the public policy perspectives, the impact on domestic and global arenas of the new spending in the IIJA, and the public policy implications.

Developing Asia’s infrastructure gap results from both inadequate public resources and a lack of effective channels to mobilize private resources toward desired outcomes. The public-private partnership (PPP) mechanism has evolved to fill the infrastructure gap. However, PPP projects are often at risk of becoming distressed, or worst, being terminated because of the long-term nature of contracts and the many different stakeholders involved. This paper applies survival-time hazard analysis to estimate how project-related, macroeconomic, and institutional factors affect the hazard rate of the projects. Empirical results show that government’s provision of guarantees, involvement of multilateral development banks, and existence of a dedicated PPP unit are important for a project’s success. Privately initiated proposals should be regulated and undergo competitive bidding to reduce the hazard rate of the project and the corresponding burden to the government. Economic growth leads to successful project outcomes. Improved legal and institutional environment can ensure PPP success.

While there has been much discussion about the large infrastructure needs in Asia and the Pacific, less attention has been paid to public expenditure efficiency in infrastructure services delivery. New constructions are not the only solution, especially when governments have limited capital to invest. Globally, new infrastructure projects face delays and cost overruns, leading to an inefficient use of public resources. The root causes include the lack of transparency in project selection, the lack of project preparation, the silo approach by public entities in assessing feasibility studies, and the lack of public sector capacity to fully develop a bankable pipeline of projects. To tackle these issues, governments need a smarter investment approach and to do so, enhancing public service efficiency is very crucial. The paper suggests a “whole life cycle” (WLC) approach as the main strategic solution for the discussed issues and challenges. We expand the definition of WLC to include the entire life cycle of the infrastructure asset from need identification to its disposal. The stages comprise planning, preparation, procurement, design, construction, operation and maintenance, and disposal. This is because we believe any efficient or inefficient decision throughout such a wide life cycle influences the quality of public services. Hence, in this holistic approach, infrastructure life cycle consists of four phases: planning, preparation, procurement, and implementation. Governments could enhance public efficiency and thus improve access to finance throughout the WLC by several solutions. These are (i) preparing infrastructure master plan and pipelines and long-term budgeting during the planning phase; (ii) establishing framework and guidelines and improving governance during preparation phase; (iii) promoting standardization, transparency, open government, and contractual consistency during the procurement phase; and finally (iv) continued role of government and total asset management during the implementation phase. In addition to these phase-specific means, key WLC solutions include proper use of technology, capacity building, and private participation in general and public-private partnership (PPP) in particular.

This study examines conditions that impact PPP delivery success or failure in the roadways sector in India using Qualitative Comparative Analysis. QCA is well-suited for problems where multiple factors combine to create pathways leading to an outcome. Past investigations have compared PPP and non-PPP project delivery performance, but this study examines performance within PPPs by uncovering a set of conditions that combine to influence the success or failure road PPP project delivery in India. Based on data from 21 cases, pathways explaining project delivery success or failure were identified. Specifically, PPPs with high concessionaire equity investment and low regional industrial activity led to project delivery success. Projects with lower concessionaire equity investment and low reliance on toll revenue and with either: (a) high project technical complexity or (b) high regional industrial activity, led to project delivery failure. The pathways identified did not have coverage values that they were extremely strong. Coverage strength was hindered by lack of access to information on additional conditions that could be configurationally important. Further, certain characteristics of the Indian market limit generalization. Identification of combinations of conditions leading to PPP project delivery success or failure improves knowledge of the impacts of structure and characteristics of these complex arrangements. This study is one of the first to use fuzzy QCA to understand project delivery success/failure in road PPP projects. Moreover, this study takes into account factors specific to a sector and delivery mode to explain project delivery performance.