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.

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.

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 has been enacted and executed since year 2000 in Taiwan.  It has been ten good years till today where lots of remediation techniques progressively employed to improve Taiwan soil and groundwater resource quality.  Regulatory agencies, academia, remediation consulting firms, on-site professional engineers all have contribute the proud ten years in terms of soil and groundwater clean-up contribution.  However, some of technologies were un-environmental friendly even detrimental and damage to Taiwan precious soil and groundwater resources.  In Article one of the current Taiwan soil and groundwater Act, it clearly stated that soil is a precious nature resources.  Soil definitely is not a waste, shame on us most of current most commonly employed remediation are unlawful and merely aiming to save time and money consideration without any care to our land.  Dig-and-dump and soil acid washing are damaged employed in almost every single local environment agency soil clean-up project.  Lot of money, effort and time has been spent during past ten years.  Most of the spending is not improving soil quality using Green approach.