This paper reviews and compares the opportunities and challenges in terms of port and intermodal development in China and India—the two fast-growing economic giants in the world. The study analyzes the future direction of these two countries’ port-hinterland intermodal development from the sustainability perspective. Both China and India face some major opportunities and challenges in port-hinterland intermodal development. The proposal of the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st-century Maritime Silk Road, also known as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), offers plentiful opportunities for China. A challenge for China is that its development of dry ports is still in the infancy stage and thus it is unable to catch up with the pace of rapid economic growth. As compared with China, India focuses more on the social aspect to protect the welfare of its residents, which in turn jeopardizes India’s port-hinterland intermodal development in the economic sense. The biggest challenge for India is its social institution, which would take a long time to change. These in-depth comparative analyses not only give the future direction of port-hinterland intermodal development in China and India but also provide references for other countries with similar backgrounds.

Starting from the ‘90s, there has been a significant increase in PPP use in the public sector in Europe, benefiting the implementation of infrastructure projects. In Italy, PPP is still much more limited than in such countries as the UK and France: the projects funded are smaller and the sectors involved are less appropriate. Based on the economic literature, European initiatives and international comparisons, the paper examines aspects of regulations that could encourage the appropriate use of PPP and considers the problems with the Italian regulations, while proposing some corrective measures. The main limitations involve: i) the absence of adequate preliminary assessments about the advantages of using PPP rather than the traditional procurement, ii) the relative lack of attention to the contract terms, iii) inadequate safeguards to ensure the bankability of the projects, and iv) limited information transparency and accessibility.

Learning from experience to improve future infrastructure public-private partnerships is a focal issue for policy makers, financiers, implementers, and private sector stakeholders. An extensive body of case studies and “lessons learned” aims to improve the likelihood of success and attempts to avoid future contract failures across sectors and geographies. This paper examines whether countries do, indeed, learn from experience to improve the probability of success of public-private partnerships at the national level. The purview of the paper is not to diagnose learning across all aspects of public-private partnerships globally, but rather to focus on whether experience has an effect on the most extreme cases of public-private partnership contract failure, premature contract cancellation. The analysis utilizes mixed-effects probit regression combined with spline models to test empirically whether general public-private partnership experience has an impact on reducing the chances of contract cancellation for future projects. The results confirm what the market intuitively knows, that is, that public-private partnership experience reduces the likelihood of contract cancellation. But the results also provide a perhaps less intuitive finding: the benefits of learning are typically concentrated in the first few public-private partnership deals. Moreover, the results show that the probability of cancellation varies across sectors and suggests the relative complexity of water public-private partnerships compared with energy and transport projects. An estimated $1.5 billion per year could have been saved with interventions and support to reduce cancellations in less experienced countries (those with fewer than 23 prior public-private partnerships).

Soil and groundwater remediation Act was enacted in year 2000. More than ten years has already passed,  Monitoring project has been completed,pollution status has been defined,contaminated sites depollution have been launched,a great progress has been made. This paper majorly to depict the extensive farmland soil qauality monittoring which is unpredent in Taiwan and believe has never been done worldwide.

This project was initiated from February 8^th, 2002 to August 8^th, 2002. The project tasks including digitalization of cadastre, farmland listing, basic information collecting, field investigation, sampling & analysis planning, field sampling, soil sample analysis, data evaluation, suggestion of contaminated farmland control, and analysis of potential pollution sources and transfer routes.

2,251 soil samples,had been sampled from Chang-Hwa County, Yun-Lin County, Nan-Tao County, and Chia-Yi City, and been analyzed in this project. 44% of these samples concentration exceed the soil pollution control standard (Table 1), including 492 farmlands (125.65 ha registered) with total contaminated farming area of 108.38 ha in Chang-Hwa, and 6 farmlands (0.39 ha registered) with total contaminated farming area of 0.39 ha in Nan-Tao County. However, the concentration of samples from Ynu-Lin County and Chia-Yi City do not exceed the soil pollution control standard.

To coordinate with the investigation results of the relative project regarding to water and sediment quality of irrigation channels in Chang-Hwa area, the pollution sources are preliminary concluded to be the irrigation channels surrounding the farmlands in Chang-Hwa area. As to the Nan-Tao County, the abandoned brick furnace plants neighboring the farmland are suspected to be the pollution sources.

The results show that the soil of the investigation area in Chang-Hwa County is the most polluted. Base on the Geostatistics study and the distribution of the irrigation channels; the area neighboring the investigated farmland in this project is suspected being polluted. For the farmlands exceeding soil control standard, Geostatistics method is suggested to coordinate with the information of the irrigation system to clarify the contaminated area so as to be the basis of land control and remediation work. As to the farmlands, not being investigated in this project but with high pollution potential according to the Geostatistics study, detail investigations are suggested. Regarding to soil pollution remediation, it is suggested to coordinate with the effluent control and irrigation channel remediation to achieve an all-out success.