1. CONTEXT AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

1.1 Context

                   Africa’s long strive for development has been noticeable over the years.  Regional integration and cooperation have been seen as the way forward for Africa and a lot so far has been done to bring about the much awaited regional integration which is seen as the vehicle for bringing about development on the continent.  The quest for Africa to develop and attain its place in the global economic order cannot occur without a functional and modern infrastructure network. Failure to attend urgently to the infrastructure demand in Africa, both at the national, regional and continental level, suggests that the continent may yet slip further behind other developing countries^[1], and also encounter further delays in its attempt to deepen integration both within the continent and the global economy. The successful integration of regional transport infrastructure in Africa is both a forerunner and facilitator of deeper economic integration. The transport networks of African states provide the foundation for effective and efficient regional trade and integration. This also impacts on the overall economic development of the connected regions and Africa at large^[2]. A noticeable effort recently observed has been the kicking off of the African Continental Free Trade Area under the Guided Trade Initiative which is expected to bring about a boost in the level of intra-regional trade among African countries.  However, these brilliant initiatives will only be made possible with the requisite infrastructural capacity. These infrastructure projects, such as transportation networks, energy grids, or telecommunications systems, are crucial for facilitating trade, mobility, and economic integration within the region. However, governments may face challenges in financing and implementing these projects alone. For instance CEMAC is still lagging in terms of road infrastructure, reveals the EU-funded program to support the management of regional and national infrastructure in CEMAC(Pagirn). The paved road links between countries are also among the weakest in the continent (15.7% of a network of 147 314 km). The poor state of infrastructure is a key bottleneck to growth in the CEMAC region and Cameroon in particular. Bridging the infrastructural deficit in Africa will require an outlay of between US$130– US$170 billion annually (AfDB 2018). In Cameroon an uneven distribution of Infrastructure is widely noticed across the country. Infrastructural deficiencies have hindered urban and economic development in Cameroon, and poorly constructed roads cause persistent traffic congestion, also the demand for infrastructural development is significantly higher than the supply[3] and this is where Public Private Partnership (PPP) can play a vital role.

Surmounting the hurdle of infrastructure deficit in Africa requires innovative project finance mechanisms that will facilitate the provision of regional physical transport infrastructures with minimal financial burden on the member states and also devoid of conditions that are oppressive and could frustrate the delivery of the projects. In this regard, Public Private Partnership (“PPP”) has been identified as a useful mechanism.^[4] PPPs can provide a mechanism for attracting private sector expertise, technology, and funding to support regional infrastructure projects. By partnering with private companies, governments can leverage their resources and share the risks and responsibilities of project development and operation. PPPs can bring efficiency, innovation, and specialized knowledge to infrastructure projects, contributing to their successful implementation and long-term sustainability. Furthermore, PPPs can foster regional cooperation and collaboration. Through cross-border partnerships, countries within a region can work together to develop and manage shared infrastructure projects. This collaboration can enhance connectivity, promote trade, and strengthen economic integration among participating countries. PPPs can also facilitate knowledge sharing and best practices exchange, allowing countries to learn from each other’s experiences and improve their own infrastructure development strategies.

Regional integration and public-private partnerships (PPPs) are interconnected in several ways. Regional integration refers to the process of countries within a specific region coming together to enhance cooperation, promote economic growth, and address common challenges. On the other hand, PPPs involve collaboration between the public and private sectors to deliver public infrastructure or services. Regional integration initiatives often require significant investments in infrastructure development. Following the 2007–2008 global financial crises there has been an increasing interest in the adoption of public–private partnership (PPP) policy by governments in both developed and developing countries. Many governments across the globe are now seeking to tap the private sector’s expertise and capital to minimize their infrastructure deficit; in this regard researchers worldwide have also attempted to investigate into the implementation and operations of this sensitive policy.^[5] Taking into account the huge capital requirement for transport development, the inefficient and the unsatisfactory nature of the current procurement method as well as the government’s inability to inject the needed financial resources into the transport infrastructure projects, the government has gradually turned it’s considerations towards realignment of infrastructure financing policies in favour of PPPs. The world bank asserts that PPPs have the potential to close the infrastructure gap by leveraging scarce public funding and introducing private sector technology and innovation to provide better quality public services through improved operational efficiency.^[6]

Public-Private Partnership  (PPP)  is  a  form of cooperation between the government and the private sector. This cooperation is often expressed through financial and technical support with the government providing the regulatory framework, public resources and oversight, while the private sector brings in expertise, innovation and financial resources. The  involvement  of  the  private  sector  in  the  development  and  financing  of  public  facilities and  services  has  increased  substantially  over  the  past  decade. PPP forms of procurement are recognised as an effective way of delivering value-for-money  in  public infrastructure  or  services.  Moreover,  PPP  seeks  to  combine  the  advantages of  competitive  tendering  and  flexible  negotiation,  and  also  allocate  risk  on  an  agreed  basis between  the  public  and  private  sectors^[7]. PPP  originated  in  the  United  Kingdom  between  the  government  and  merchant  banks  several centuries  ago  with  the  development  of  mines  that  PPPs  have  been  in  existence  in  the  UK  for  many  decades^[8].  The term “PPP”  was  first  used  in  the  USA  in  the  1960s  to  refer  to  typical  urban  development projects  involving  private  investors.  Since  1960s,  the  PPP  concepts  spread  all over  the  world  in  various  forms  and  is  becoming  increasingly  popular  both  as  an  alternative procurement  option  for  the  public  sector  and  a  good  investment  opportunity  for  private investors.   The  forms  of  PPPs  used  for  the  execution  of  infrastructure  projects include  build-operate-transfer  (BOT),  build-transfer-operate  (BTO),  design-build-finance-operate  (DBFO),  build-own-operate  (BOO),  design-build-operate-maintain  (DBOM)  among others.  

This study attempts to contribute to the development of theoretical and practical approaches for the proper application of PPP in CEMAC and Cameroon in particular and to reveal problems that stop successful implementation of this mechanism in current realities.

1.2 Justification

The choice of the topic “The Role of Public-Private-Partnerships on Road Transport Infrastructure and Regional Integration in CEMAC: The case of the Partnership between the China Harbour Engineering Company and the Government of Cameroon” is highly relevant for the regional integration process in Africa. Regional integration aims to enhance economic cooperation and connectivity among African countries, facilitating trade and development. However, the success of regional integration initiatives, such as the African Continental Free Trade Area, heavily relies on the presence of robust and efficient transport infrastructure. In the context provided, it is emphasized that road transport infrastructure is a crucial enabler for enhancing trade in an economy. The existing road transport infrastructure in developing countries and CEMAC countries in particular is deficient and worrisome, unable to meet the demands of economic growth and population increase. National governments alone lack the financial capacity to provide the necessary funds for large-scale road transport infrastructure projects. This creates a significant infrastructural deficit across the continent.

To address this deficit and enhance regional integration, alternative means of financing are required. Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) emerge as a credible vehicle for developing the nation’s transport infrastructure.  PPPs involve the private sector in the development and financing of public facilities and services, allowing for increased efficiency, value-for-money, and risk allocation. The African Union recognises the importance of PPP in its Agenda 2063 as a potential financing source which could be made possible through the development of “framework conditions” (policy, legal, regulatory and institutional)[9]. Furthermore, imbedded in the CEMAC’s Regional Economic Program specifically in its second strategic priority area on good governance and the business environment, it mentions the need to set up a regulatory and an institutional framework for investments and PPP as a means of boosting the inflow of financial resources relevant for undertaking the different infrastructural projects[10].

By exploring the utilization of PPPs for transport infrastructure development in CEMAC, with a focus on Cameroon, the work contributes greatly to the regional integration process. It addresses the pressing need for sufficient financing and expertise to bridge the infrastructural gap, facilitating improved connectivity, trade facilitation, and economic growth. The findings and recommendations of this research can provide valuable insights for policymakers, stakeholders, and development organizations working towards regional integration and the sustainable development of transport infrastructure within CEMAC and in Africa at large. Despite numerous studies on PPPs in Africa, none have specifically focused on transport sector-specific PPP arrangements in Cameroon to examine the role of PPP in enhancing regional integration and the possible challenges faced by governments and private entities in implementing successful PPP initiatives for financing transport infrastructure projects. This work aims to fill this gap and provide answers to these questions.       

2. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

2.1 Spatial Scope

                    The field of study of our subject is CEMAC, with focus on the case of Cameroon. According to the United Nations (UN), CEMAC can be defined as a region of Africa comprising the south of the Sahara, East of the West African Shield and West of the Great Rift Valley”; it has an area of ​​6,613,000 km², with a population of 163,495,000 inhabitants and is made up of nine (09) countries namely Cameroon, the Central African Republic (CAR), the Republic of Congo, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon, Angola, Equatorial Guinea, Chad and Sao Tome and Principe.

Cameroon, on the other hand, officially the Republic of Cameroon (French: République du Cameroun), is a country in the CEMAC region. It is bordered by Nigeria to the West; Chad to the northeast; the Central African Republic to the East; and Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and the Republic of the Congo to the south. Cameroon’s landmass is 472,710 km2 (182,510 sq mi), with 2,730 km2 (1,050 sq mi) of water. Cameroon with capital being Yaoundé counts a total of 28 million people in 2023. The partnership between the government of Cameroon and the China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC) on the kribi-lolabé highway in the Ocean Division, South region of Cameroon will be our main area of study.

2.2 Temporal Scope

The temporal scope will consist in determining the time frame which will serve as a base for observing the phenomenon under study. For this work we chose both an upper and a lower limit time frame.  The lower limit of the work is 2015, while the upper limit is 2023. This choice wasn’t made coincidentally. The year 2015 corresponds to the year in which the project for the construction of the Kribi-lolabé highway entered into effect. Although the project ended in 2022 followed by an official inauguration ceremony, upper limit of this work will be 2023 which  marks the entering into force of the new the PPP regulation in Cameroon which is a very vital aspect to be considered in the course of this work.

3. CLARIFICATION OF KEY CONCEPTS

For us to better understand this work, it will be important that some key concepts be defined to avoid any confusion or better still to guide the reader and give him/her a better insight of the topic. Just like Emile Durkheim said, “The first approach of any sociologist is to define that which he studies, so as for us to know exactly what it is all about.”[11] Some of the key terms that we can outline here are; Partnership, Public-Private Partnership, Regional integration and Transport Infrastructure.

3.1 Partnership

According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a partnership is defined as “an agreement between organizations, people, etc. to work together”]. It refers to a collaborative relationship where two or more entities come together to achieve a common goal or engage in a joint venture. This agreement can involve organizations, individuals, or a combination of both[12].

Partnership involves co-operation, i.e. “to work or act together” and in a public policy can be defined as co-operation between people or organisations in the public or private sector for mutual benefit[13]. Harding[14] sets out a similar general definition of ‘private-public partnership’ as “any action which relies on the agreement of actors in the public and private sectors and which also contributes in some way to improving the urban economy and the quality of life”, although he argues that this has limited conceptual value. Bailey (1994)[15] provides a working definition of private-public partnership in urban regeneration as “the mobilisation of a coalition of interests drawn from more than one sector in order to prepare and oversee an agreed strategy for regeneration of a defined area.”

Taking an economic development perspective, Sellgren[16] defines partnership as a scheme with involvement or funding from more than one agency. Bennett and Krebs [17] similarly stress the joint objectives of the bodies and defines partnership as co-operation between actors where they agree to work together towards a specified economic development objective and draw the key distinction between generalised policy communities that develop a broad local vision for the area or local economy and the specific networks (or partnerships) that are necessary to support individual projects.

3.2 Public Private Partnership

Public Private Partnerships are not a new concept in international relations or public policy, there exist a plethora of varied definitions and a multiplicity of arguments on PPPs based on context and fields of operation. But what do we actually call PPPs? PPPs are generally understood to entail service delivery partnerships between public and nongovernmental sector agents–partnerships that incorporate the sharing of responsibility, authority, risk, and accountability[18]. Koppenjan 2005 defines PPPs as “a form of structured cooperation between public and private partners in planning/construction and/or exploitation of infrastructure facilities in which they share or allocate risks, costs, benefits, resources and responsibilities”[19]. Very close to this definition is that of Grimsey & Lewis, they define PPPs as “arrangements whereby private parties participate in, or provide support for the provision of infrastructure, and a PPP project results in a contract for a private entity to delivery public infrastructure based services.”[20]Both definitions are mostly situated within infrastructure development and risk sharing within partnerships.

Phumpiu & Gustafsson 2009 use Rein et al 2005’s definition to describe that partnerships denote the participation of the private sector within public service activities. Noting that it “refers to a contract between the public and private sector, a ‘client-contractor relationship’ or outsourcing arrangements bound by contrac a shift of responsibilities usually from public to private sector”[21]. This definition is very operational and can be used within varied context of PPPs, but it could also be erroneous to generally term partnerships as a shift of responsibilities from the Public to private sector, partnerships could also be joint responsibilities.

Amongst the varied discussions on an operational definition of PPPs we found two very captivating expressions of the concept. The first is given by Schäferhoff et al. He defines PPPs as “institutionalized transboundary interactions between public and private sectors which aim at the provision of collective goods.”[22]  This definition clearly fits within my context and also briefly summarizes most of the other definitions presented by various authors. But it simply focus on transboundary interactions, meaning the downside might be leaving out local NGOs which partner with the public service for the same purposes. But Bovaird 2004 offers a more encompassing definition, he defines PPPs as “working arrangements based on a mutual commitment (over and above that implied in any contract) between a public sector organization with any other organization outside the public service.”[23]  This can not only be looked upon as a bottom line definition but almost completely includes all types of Public Private Partnerships, giving it a broad but practical outlook of public private partnerships with all domains. It is permits a better operationalization of the concept.

The Asian Development Bank defines PPP as “A contractual arrangement between public (national, state, provincial, or local) and private entities through which the skills, assets, and/or financial resources of each of the public and private sectors are allocated in a complementary manner, thereby sharing the risks and rewards, to seek to provide optimal service delivery and good value to citizens”^[24]

After considering the various definitions provided, the most suitable definition of PPP for our research topic is that provided by Koppenjan. His definition explicitly refers to the planning, construction, and operation of infrastructure facilities. This is directly relevant to my study, which focuses on the Kribi-Lolabé Highway project a road transport infrastructure initiative under the PPP model. Since the core focus of this research is on road infrastructure development, a definition that specifically addresses infrastructure is critical.

3.3 Regional Integration

Integration in its basic sense referred to the bringing together of different parties in view of creating a unified whole.

Marie Claude SMOUTS, Dario BATTISTELA and Pascal VENESSON, in Dictionary of International Relations define regional integration as “any process by which the regularity and intensity of relations between certain States and between certain societies increase allowing constitution of a security community of increased economic interdependence, of a shared identity, favoring in a particular geographical area, the development of institutionalized collective actions which can go as far as political unification.”^[25]

Ernst HAAS understands integration as “a process and a collective and community dynamic in which elites transfer their loyalties, expectations and political activities to a new center whose institutions possess and claim skills superior to those of the pre-existing national states^[26]. This dynamic which involves non-state units and actions results in a transfer of loyalty from the national level to the community level. The objective of integration, whether economic, monetary or political, is to allow States and political units to carry out missions of common interest together. Here the supra-state structures define the rules of common conduct likely to consolidate mutual relations between the States parties to the integration process and allow them to have an influence on the international level. It is the constitution of a common entity. He further defines political integration as the “process by which political actors in several distinct national frameworks are brought to transfer their allegiances, their expectations and political activities towards a new center whose institutions possess or require a jurisdiction over pre-existing national states.”^[27]

Guy HERMET and Bertrand BADIE defined integration in an extensive perspective.^[28] According to them, integration is a process by which multiple links are forged either between States, or directly between human groups, national communities and which can reach a degree of relativization of the principle of national sovereignty. This is a sociological and multi-centered perspective: sociological in the sense that what is highlighted is the development of relationships between human communities from different States and multi-centered because unlike the centric state-based approach, which makes States the main actors in the integration process, here there is the consideration of a multiplicity of actors who intervene in the process.

We can also define integration following Pierre François GONIDEC as a process of increase and accentuation of economic activities between States due to the ease of transport of goods and services in a sub-region.^[29] In other words, it is a voluntary association of States of a region or sub-region with a view to a political, economic, social and cultural grouping making it possible to cope with the complexity of international society.

For Bruno BEKOLO EBE, regional integration is not only a simple act of construction of a political or economic space, much less of a market, but a profound process of modification and structural transformation which takes place within a regional space made up of several countries and which is able to trigger the social and economic development of these countries in a sustainable manner.^[30]

            The definition which best paints a vivid picture of our work is that propounded by Pierre François GONIDEC where he sees it as as a process of increase and accentuation of economic activities between States due to the ease of transport of goods and services in a sub-region. This happens to be the expected end of this work to ease transportations which will lead to increase trad activities and hence regional integration among states.

According to the oxford English dictionary, a road is a wide way leading from one place to another, especially one with a specially prepared surface which vehicles can use.[31] The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) consider a road to be “a line of communication (travelled way) open to public traffic, primarily for the use of road motor vehicles running on their own wheels, which includes bridges, tunnels, supporting structures, junctions, crossings, interchanges, and toll roads.”[32] Also the European Commission considers that the main purpose of a road network is to provide connections, which are reasonably fast and direct, between places.[33]

3.5 Transport Infrastructure

The term “infrastructure” is used on various scientific and non-scientific fields. It originates from Latin, and namely the word “infra” is understood as grounds or fundamentals while “structure” means distribution of elements of certain undefined setup. By the definition, “infrastructure” is the basic systems and services, such as transport and power supplies, that a country or organization uses in order to work effectively.^[34]According to Prudhomme infrastructure can be described as capital goods that are consumed together with labour and other inputs to provide public services. They include transport (roads, bridges, rails, ports and airports), energy (power distribution and generation), water (water treatment and sewerage disposal), and social infrastructure (schools, housing, hospitals and prisons).[35] Infrastructure has been widely accepted as fundamental to growth and development. While the findings of Mamatzakis confirmed the role of infrastructure to the economic development of Greece[36], Mentolio and Sole-Olle  further reiterated by affirming the role of investment in roads in increasing the productivity of labour in the Spanish regions.[37] More recently, the role of infrastructure in development has been heightened in the global development agenda, specifically towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2015).

The World Bank defines transport infrastructure as “the physical networks, facilities, and systems that support the movement of people, goods, and services.” This definition highlights the importance of physical elements such as roads, railways, airports, ports, and their associated systems in enabling regional integration. It emphasizes the need for well-developed infrastructure to ensure seamless connectivity and efficient transportation processes (World Bank, 2010).

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) defines transport infrastructure as “all the physical assets and structures that enable the movement of people and goods by various modes of transport.” This definition broadens the scope to include all modes of transport, recognizing the interconnectedness required for effective regional integration (UNECE, 2017).

3.6 Development

According to Francois Perroux, development is a combination of economic growth and broader social and mental changes within a population that enable it to sustainably and cumulatively increase its real overall output. Unlike growth, which focuses mainly on quantitative aspects such as labor, capital, and technical progress, development encompasses a qualitative transformation, including improved allocation of resources, enhanced factor quality, learning, and innovation.[38]. Amartya Sen conceptualizes development primarily as “freedom,” stressing the importance of expanding individual capabilities and choices; he posits that economic growth should serve as a means to enhance personal freedoms rather than being an end in itself.[39] Walter Rodney on his part  emphasizes that development can be seen as the transition from traditional to modern societies, focusing on productivity enhancements, technological advancements, and transformative social changes as critical elements of development.[40] Adding to this discourse, Jeffrey Sachs argues that sustainable development must be rooted in environmental stewardship, economic growth, and social equity, thus highlighting the need for a holistic approach to development. Similarly, Paul Collier asserts that development entails addressing the structural challenges faced by low-income countries, emphasizing the importance of governance, infrastructure, and international cooperation in achieving sustainable progress[41]. Together, these perspectives illustrate development as a dynamic process characterized by improvements in individual freedoms, economic growth, social transformation, and environmental sustainability.

4. INTEREST OF THE STUDY

Delving into the role of public-private partnerships (PPPs) on road transport infrastructure and regional integration in the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC) with a specific focus on the partnership between the China Harbour Engineering Company and the Government of Cameroon holds significant scientific and practical interest.

4.1 Scientific Interest:

This study holds significant scientific interest by contributing to the academic understanding of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in developing economies, particularly within the CEMAC region. Through an examination of the partnership between the and the China Harbour Engineering Company, it offers valuable insights into the dynamics, challenges, and opportunities of such collaborations. The research has the potential to advance theoretical frameworks related to PPPs, infrastructure development, and regional integration by refining existing models with empirical evidence and case-specific analysis. Additionally, the study’s findings could have important policy implications, guiding policymakers and stakeholders in infrastructure development and regional integration efforts by identifying best practices, challenges, and success factors within the CEMAC region and beyond.

4.2 Practical Interest:

This study holds practical interest by highlighting the role of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in fostering economic development within the CEMAC region through road transport infrastructure. It underscores the potential of leveraging private sector expertise and resources to address infrastructure gaps and improve connectivity, which is vital for regional economic growth. Additionally, the research can offer valuable insights into the socioeconomic impact of enhanced road transport infrastructure on local communities, trade facilitation, and regional integration. These findings can be crucial for stakeholders involved in development planning, investment, and community engagement.

^[1] Vivien FOSTER and Cecilia BRICENO-GARMENDIA (eds.), Africa’s Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation – Overview (The World Bank, Infrastructure Consortium for Africa), 2010, p. 1.

^[2]  Shemmy SIMUYEMBA, Linking Africa through Regional Infrastructure (African Development Bank Economic Research, Paper No. 64, Botswana, 2000, p. 5.

[3] Bin MEH and Mary Sandra AYUK,“Determinates of Infrastructural Development in Cameroon”, Nkafu Policy Institute, Yaoundé, 2022, P.4.

^[4] NEPAD, Revision of the African Union/NEPAD African Action Plan 2010-2015: Advancing Regional and Continental Integration Together through Shared Values, 2011.

^[5]  Robert OSEI-KYEI, Albert P.C. CHAN, “Review of studies on the Critical Success Factors for Public–Private Partnership (PPP) projects from 1990 to 2013” International Journal of Project Management, 2015, pp. 1335–1346.

^[6] World Bank. World Bank Group Support to Public-Private Partnerships: Lessons from Experience in Client Countries,Washington, DC: World Bank, 2015.

^[7] Chan, A.P.C., et al. “Potential Obstacles to Successful Implementation of Public-Private Partnerships in Beijing and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2010.

^[8] Origin of Public Private Partnerships, September 2023, at 8:50am,  https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law essays/commercial-law/origin-of-public-private-partnerships-commercial

[9] African Union, A shared strategic framework for inclusive growth and sustainable development & a global strategy to optimize the use of Africa’s resources for the benefit of all Africans, 2015, P.125.

[10] CEMAC, “ Regional Economic Program Operational Plan 2011-2015”, July 2012, p. 40.

[11] Emile DURKHEIM, Les règles de la méthode sociologique, Québec, édition électronique, 2002, p. 9.

[12] Definition of partnership from the Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press)

[13] Robert HOLLAND, “The New Era in Public-Private Partnerships” in P.R. Porter and D.C. Sweet (eds) Rebuilding America’s Cities: Roads to Recovery. New Brunswick, NJ, Center for Urban Policy Research, p. 1984.

[14] Alan HARDING., “Public-Private Partnerships in Urban Regeneration, in M. Campbell, Local Economic Policy”, London, 1990, p 110.

[15] Nick BAILEY, “Towards a research agenda for public-private partnerships in the 1990’s, Local Economy”, 8, 1994, pp. 292-306.

[16] John SELLGREN, “Local Economic Development Partnerships – An Assessment of Local Authority Economic Development Initiatives”, Local Government Studies, 1990, pp. 57-78.

[17] Robert J. BENNETT and George KREBS, “Local Economic Development Partnerships: An Analysis of Policy Networks in EC-LEDA Local Employment Development Strategies”, Regional Studies, 28, 1994, pp. 119-140

[18] Jonathan JOHNSTON and Barbara S. ROMZEK ,“Traditional contracts as partnerships: effective accountability in social service contracts in the American states”, in Greve C & Hodge G (eds), The Challenge of Public-Private Partnerships: Learning from International Experience. Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, 2005, p. 117.

[19] Joop KOPPENJAN, “The Formation of Public, Private Partnerships. Lessons from Nine Transport Infrastructure Projects in the Netherlands”, .Public Administration, 2005, p. 137.

[20] David GRIMSEY and Mark. LEWIS, Public Private Partnerships: The worldwide Revolution in  Infrastrusture Provision and Project Finance. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Northampton. 2007, P. 2.

[21] Patricia PHUMPIU and Jan GUSTAFSSON, “When are Partnerships a Viable Tool for Development? Institutions and Partnerships for Water and Sanitation Service in Latin America”, Water Resources Management, 2005, pp. 19-38.

[22] Marco SCHÄFERHOFF, Sabine CAMPE, and Christopher KAAN, “Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations: Making Sense of Concepts, Research Frameworks, and Results”, International Studies Review, 11, 2009, p. 455.

[23] Tony BOVAIRD,“Public-Private partnerships: from contested concepts to prevalent practices”, International Review of Administrative Sciences 70(2), 2004, p. 200.

^[24] Asian Development Bank (ADB), Public-Private Partnership Operational Plan 2012–2020, 2020, p 2.

^[25] Marie Claude. SMOUTS, Dario BATTISTELA, and Pascal VENNESSON, Dictionnaire des relations internationales. Paris: Dalloz, 2003, p. 234.

^[26]  Ernst HAAS, the uniting of Europe, Standford, Standford, university press, 1958, pp. 6-7

^[27] Ernst HAAS., ibid.

^[28] Bertrand BADIE and Guy HERMET , la politique comparée, Paris, Dalloz, 2001, pp 10-12

^[29] Pierre-François GONIDEC, les organisations internationales Africaines étude comparative, Paris, l’harmattan, 2006, pp 45-46

^[30] Bruno BEKOLO EBE, « l’intégration régionale en Afrique: caractéristiques, contraintes et perspectives », mondes en développement, 3, 2001, pp 81-88.

[31] Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 2023.

[32] United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), Inland Transport Committee. Retrieved from https://unece.org/transport/committee/road-transport/road-transport-inland-transport-committee\, November 2023, 11:45am.

[33] European Commission, Road Infrastructure In Europe: Road Length And Its Impact On Road Performance, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2022, p.5.

^[34] Cambridge Advance Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus (2023).

[35] Robert PRUDHOMME, Infrastructure and Development, Washington DC, Paper prepared for the ABCDE (Annual Bank Conference on Development Economics), May 3, 2004.

[36] Emmanuel C. MAMATZAKIS, “Economic performance and public infrastructure: an application to Greek manufacturing”. Bulletin of Economic Research, 60(3), 2008, pp. 307-326.

[37] Daniel MONTOLIO and Albert SOLÉ-OLLE ,“Road investment and regional productivity growth: the effects of vehicle intensity and congestion”, Papers in Regional Science, 88(1), 2009, pp. 99-118.

[38] Wilfrid AZAN. « Du concept de développement chez F. Perroux aux théories de la performance par le changement organisationnel en sciences de gestion. Identification et maîtrise des risques : enjeux pour l’audit, la comptabilité et le contrôle de gestion », Belgique, May 2003, p.5

[39] Sen, AMARTYA., “Development, Rights and Human Security,” New York: United Nations, 2003, pp. 8–9.

[40] W. Rodney, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Lagos, Panafrican Publishing Inc., 2005, p.1-2

[41]  Paul COLLIER, “Development economics in retrospect and prospect”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 31, Number 2, 2015, pp. 242–258