Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

The need to clarify the understanding of the category of public-private partnership in domestic legislation

Makarov Ivan Nikolaevich

Doctor of Economics

Professor of the Department of Management and General Humanitarian Disciplines, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Lipetsk branch

398050, Russia, Lipetsk region, Lipetsk, International, 12b

excellennzz@gmail.com
Other publications by this author
 

 
Shelud'ko Artem Sergeevich

Arbitration Manager, Center for Financial Recovery of Agro-Industrial Enterprises

125167, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Leningradsky Prospekt str., 49

excellennzzz@mail.ru
Drobot Elena Valer'evna

ORCID: 0000-0002-5205-5455

PhD in Economics

Teacher, Center of Additional Professional Education

188800, Russia, Leningrad region, Vyborg, Primorskaya str., 32

elenadrobot@mail.ru

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0706.2023.10.44067

EDN:

ZATNVD

Received:

19-09-2023


Published:

09-10-2023


Abstract: The subject of the study is public-private partnership as a legal category. It should be noted that the introduction of the PPP system into the Russian legal system (practice) has become one of the most important decisions taken by the government to stimulate the economic growth of the country. The authors analyze the essence and interpretation of public-private partnership as a complex economic and legal phenomenon that constitutes the interaction of the state and private sector entities in the framework of the implementation of socially significant projects. The research methodology is based on the use of general scientific and private scientific methods (analysis, comparison, generalization, etc.), methods of studying the genesis of the phenomenon, interpretation of the structure and content of political and legal doctrines, as well as comparative and structural analysis, allowing to reveal the essential characteristics of the phenomenon under study. As a scientific novelty, the authors propose a number of additions to the Federal Law-224, including an augmented approach to the definition of public-private partnership. The authors noted that the criterion for generating goods (public, as well as mixed and mixed communal goods), in particular, during the implementation of other forms of agreements, should become a criterion for separating other forms of agreements between the state and representatives of the private sector – economic entities and what can (should) be classify it as a quasi-PPP, and the presence of 2 other signs is a dividing line between a quasi–PPP and a "full-fledged" public-private partnership.


Keywords:

public-private partnership, state, private partner, public good, communal benefit, project, consumption, law, society, benefit

This article is automatically translated.

In our country, public-private partnership is officially associated with the 224-FZ adopted in 2015 (Federal Law "On Public-Private Partnership, Municipal-Private Partnership in the Russian Federation and Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation" dated 13.07.2015 No. 224-FZ).

At the same time, it should be noted that the introduction of the public-private partnership system (hereinafter — PPP) into the Russian legal system (practice) has become one of the most important decisions taken by the Government to stimulate the economic growth of the country. One of the main reasons for the widespread use of PPP is its potential to attract private sector financing in industries and activities under the jurisdiction and attention of the state.

It should be noted that the study of various aspects and features of the use of public-private partnership instruments has traditionally been given a lot of attention in both domestic and foreign scientific research.

Among the scientific studies published in recent years in Russian scientific journals, in our opinion, the following publications are of interest. Ablyazov T. H. and Marusin A.V. consider public-private partnership as a mechanism for the development of transport infrastructure in the conditions of the formation of the digital economy [1, p. 1271-1280]. Baranova I. V. and Muradov A. A. analyze the tools for improving the efficiency of innovation activities of public-private partnership structures [2, p. 12-19]. E. A. Barbashina notes the special role of public-private partnership in managing the processes of innovative development of the Russian economy [3, pp. 119-130]. Brovchak S. V., Smirnova A. A., Zotov I. A., Mingazov A. R., Golovko A.D. studies the place of public-private partnership in the financial model of social economy [4, pp. 1377-1392]. Of particular interest, including in the context of our research, is the article by E. M. Buchwald, in which he pays special attention to the legal foundations of public-private partnership in the context of the implementation of national projects in the Russian Federation [5, pp. 503-516]. Vavilina A.V., Kirillova O. Yu., Malinovskaya M. I. conclude that the implementation of public-private partnership models in the development of regional infrastructure in Russia is promising [6, pp. 1255-1270]. The civil nature of agreements in the field of public-private partnership is considered by V. V. Kilinkarov and B. A. Ponomarev [7, pp. 44-54]. A series of articles by A.V. Kireeva is also interesting, in which she analyzes the possibilities of using public-private partnership in the field of control and coercion, considering PPP as a new element of the state mechanism [8, pp. 47-58; 9, pp. 1251-1257]. New opportunities of public-private partnership in the crisis period are evaluated by Knyazev Yu. K. [10, p. 1679-1692]. Maslova S. V. considers the role of international organizations in regulating relations in the field of public-private partnership [11, p. 1-15]. And finally, Mendelos E. I. writes that public-private partnership is a factor of "inclusive" political and economic development [12, pp. 51-56].

As for foreign scientific journals and publications of foreign authors, it can be noted that the problems of PPP are of universal scientific interest, and the geography of authors and the regions they study is very wide: these are Asian republics (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, etc.), Malaysia, China, and many other countries. Moreover, in general, PPP projects are of greater interest to researchers from developing countries. At the same time, in many foreign publications, PPP is considered in the context of its impact on sustainable development. For example, Abdul Latif A. S. and co-authors assess the impact of contract management on the ratio of critical success factors and the effectiveness of public-private partnership in Malaysia [13, p. 109]. Afieroho U. E. and co-authors study the government approach to creating social value within the framework of public-private partnership projects in the process of urban infrastructure transformation [14, p. 1225]. Castelblanco G., Safari P. and De Marco A. investigate public-private partnerships in the field of healthcare [15, p. 2452]. Kitsai Yu. A. and co-authors study the use of the mechanism of public-private partnership for sustainable development [16, pp. 91-100]. Li Z. and Wang H. risk factors affecting the sustainable results of global public-private partnership projects are identified [17, p. 2140]. Majer K. M. and co-authors define measures of effective risk management for public-private partnership infrastructure projects in developing countries [18, p. 14149]. Miranda-Poggis A. G. and Morena M. assess the problems of PPP in modern housing construction [19, p. 4859]. Mohamed Abdelkader E. and co-authors propose a multi-criteria decision-making model for evaluating public-private partnership in transport projects [20, p. 3559]. Mostafa F., Elsayd A.M., Id M. S., and others write about the need for a fair distribution of risks in public-private partnership projects [21, pp. 1-12]. Shi S. and co-authors investigated the impact of the interdependence of tasks on the effectiveness of the team in public–private partnership projects [22, p. 13429]. Peng S.-Yu. raises an important question about public-private interaction in the management of privacy [23, p. 80]. In the book edited by B. Weiss, the authors attempted to consider the impact of public-private partnership on the financing of the general welfare of the country's population [24]. Rubtsova N. V. analyzes the place of public-private partnership in the regulation of entrepreneurial activity in Russia [25, p. 1566-1576]. Song Yu. and Hao S. assess the impact of project management mechanisms on the sustainable development of public-private partnership in China [26, p. 2424]. Vaslavsky Yu. I. and Vaslavskaya I. Yu. assess the problems of implementing public-private partnership projects in the context of the global social crisis COVID-19 [27, p. 012046]. Zhang H. with co-authors, they investigate the impact of the interdependence of teams on the effectiveness of cooperation in PPP projects in the context of the mitigating effect of government equity participation [28, p. 12684].

It must be recognized that the category of PPP is currently more widely developed in economic theory than in jurisprudence, which makes it necessary to conduct case studies on this issue. Moreover, in our opinion, in this case, the justification of legal provisions should "grow" from both economic practice and our country, as well as foreign experience and, even more significantly, from the theoretical developments of economic science regarding the essential nature and purpose of public-private partnership.

Historically, our state has played different roles in the process of forming economic relations — from complete non-interference to total control over the economy. In this regard, the theoretical and methodological assessment of the prerequisites and conditions, primarily legal, for the creation of a PPP in Russia seems to be more important than understanding the mechanics of PPP implementation or analyzing financial and economic indicators. According to economic research, the study of financial and economic indicators when creating a PPP in Russia is less important than the legal, legal and political aspects of the topic.

However, the structuring of such PPPs is a jurisdictional and practical issue, and the legal framework should correspond to the economic, social and financial goals of all participants in such a partnership.

In addition, it should be borne in mind that domestic judicial practice has not yet developed a comprehensive and systematic understanding of PPP, in particular PPP agreements. Therefore, the main focus of legal research in this area is to develop a specific legal framework that meets the political, economic, social and financial goals of all participants in such a partnership. This framework should be aimed at creating institutional conditions under which the problems associated with PPP can be successfully solved.

And the main problem we see here is that the domestic regulatory framework does not adequately reflect the socio-economic and political purpose of both individual partnerships and the entire system of public-private partnership.

For a more correct understanding of the problematic nature of the issue and the possibility of its legal interpretation and solution, let's consider the essence and socio-political and economic purpose of PPP.

First of all, it should be noted that the partnership of the state and private sector entities is a method of ensuring the interaction of the public and private sectors on the basis of agreements—agreements on the interaction of the state, represented by the relevant authorities, and a private participant in legal relations. It is based on financial contributions, risk sharing and the pooling of rights, duties and responsibilities for the processes of generating and implementing public goods, including the implementation of national plans and state programs, sustainable economic development and other social benefits, which in the framework of political economy are called "patronized" goods. Accordingly, in general, PPP is a civil phenomenon regulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation and aimed at the integral formation of the economic system of the country (state, household enterprises) and its growth.

The following is an analysis of the main definitions of public-private partnership available in domestic and foreign scientific literature.

M. B. Gerrard and A. Pankratov adhere to the position that PPP should be considered as "a borderline institution in the field of state and business relations, which is neither an institution of privatization nor an institution of nationalization, but only a form of optimization of the state's performance of its duties to society, i.e. uninterrupted presentation of public goods to the population" [29, p. 29]. The authors clarify that this understanding of PPP is a translation of the definition of public-private partnership proposed in their work [30]. In this definition of public-private partnership, the following most significant points can be identified:

1) the production of patronized goods is thought of as the main purpose of PPP;

2) the approach to public-private partnership is applied precisely as an economic institution;

3) the "borderline" state of PPP between the public and private sectors of the economy is fixed and highlighted;

4) partnership is considered as a macro-level phenomenon.

According to the definition of PPP given by V. Varnavsky, in its essence, public-private partnership is "an institutional and organizational alliance between the state and business in order to implement national and international, large-scale and local, but always socially significant projects in a wide range of fields of activity" [31, p. 5]. As we can see, V. Varnavsky also focuses on the high social significance of the benefits supplied by the PPP system, expressed in his definition of PPP as "socially significant projects", which allows us to conclude that there are elements of a project management approach in his understanding of the phenomenon of public-private partnership. The analysis of PPP in the works of this researcher is carried out from the positions of the macro-level and meso-level (industry aspect).

Another theorist M. Vilisov defines public-private partnership as "a legal mechanism for coordinating the interests and ensuring equality between the state and business in the framework of economic projects aimed at achieving the goals of public administration" [32, p. 54]. In its definition, it is necessary to highlight such significant features of public-private partnership as:

1) the existence of a legal mechanism for coordinating the interests of partners;

2) the existence of a legal mechanism that ensures equality of partners.

It is also necessary to include the analysis of public-private partnership as an economic mechanism among the features of the definition of PPP given by M. Vilisov, which confirms the hypothesis of an interdependent relationship between economic and legal components in the work of PPP.

From the point of view of E. Dynin, "PPP is the combination of tangible and intangible resources of society (state or local government) and the private sector on a long—term and mutually beneficial basis for the creation of public goods (landscaping and development of territories, development of engineering and social infrastructure) or the provision of public services (in the field of education, health, social protection and etc.)" [33, p. 15]. In addition to the provision on the creation of public goods as the main purpose of PPP, voiced in the above definitions of public-private partnership, E. Dynin's definition focuses on the pooling of resources as the basis for the functioning of public-private partnership, that is, this author considers PPP from the materialistic position of the resource approach.

As a result of the presented review of theoretical approaches to understanding PPP, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. The majority of Russian scientists who studied public-private partnership considered this socio-economic phenomenon separately, from the standpoint of property relations, systemic resource and institutional approaches.

2. Domestic and foreign researchers of public-private partnership have identified three fundamental criteria that allow unambiguously identifying the partnership as a project activity:

a) the presence of consolidation of the resources of the state in the person of its authorized representative and an economic entity — a representative of the private sector;

b) the existence of a mechanism for consolidating and redistributing the totality of risks accompanying the public-private partnership project throughout its implementation;

c) the existence of a target purpose — the generation of socially significant benefits, the focus on providing society with the necessary resources that have the character of a public, mixed and mixed communal good — that is, patronized goods.

Since in the process of public-private partnership research we consider PPP from the point of view of project management and the nature of the benefits produced, as well as from the standpoint of resource, institutional and systemic approaches, respectively, when developing the classification of PPP forms as a complex systemic phenomenon, it is necessary to develop a system of features based on the principles of these approaches. At the same time, due to the fact that PPP at the micro level is one of the forms of interaction of economic agents, it is necessary to take into account the already identified signs of PPP, extending them to all forms of partnership.

The principles of the resource approach, therefore, based on our definition of public-private partnership, should be embodied in a sign of the formation of a legally formalized mechanism for pooling or delegating resources and redistributing risks, which we have paid attention to in our other works [34, 35].

Now let's consider the legist, i.e. the "official" definition of public-private partnership, enshrined in 224-FZ (Federal Law No. 224-FZ of 13.07.2015 (ed. of 29.12.2022) "On Public-Private Partnership, Municipal-Private Partnership in the Russian Federation and Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation"). As noted in article 3 of this law, "public-private partnership, municipal-private partnership is a legally formalized for a certain period and based on pooling resources, risk sharing cooperation between a public partner, on the one hand, and a private partner, on the other hand, which is carried out on the basis of a public-private partnership agreement, an agreement on municipal-private partnerships concluded in accordance with this Federal Law in order to attract private investment into the economy, ensure the availability of goods, works, services and improve their quality by state authorities and local self-government bodies."

The key point to which, in our opinion, it is necessary to pay attention is the presence of two of the three mandatory elements in the law, while a full, exhaustive definition should contain all three elements.

This is where such methodological complexity manifests itself, as the lack of consolidation of the concept of "patronized good" in domestic legislation and legal practice.

At the same time, we must remember that the criterion for generating patronized benefits during the implementation of other forms of agreements should become a criterion for separating other forms of agreements between the state and representatives of the private sector — economic entities and what can (should) be classify it as a quasi-PPP, and the presence of two other signs is a dividing line between a quasi—PPP and a "full-fledged" public-private partnership.

Thus, in our opinion, the definition of "public-private partnership" should be stated as follows: "public-private partnership, municipal-private partnership — legally formalized for a certain period and based on pooling resources, risk sharing cooperation of a public partner, on the one hand, and a private partner, on the other hand, which it is carried out on the basis of an agreement on public-private partnership, an agreement on municipal-private partnership concluded in accordance with this Federal Law to attract private investment into the economy, in order to ensure that state authorities and local self-government bodies implement their functions, which consist in generating socially significant benefits having the nature of a patronized good."

Accordingly, the concept of "patronized good" is "a good that has the character of a pure public, mixed and mixed communal good, the key characteristics of which are the possibility of determining the price for an individual consumer and the presence of both private and public effects from individual consumption of this good."

This should be a key difference with contracts for the supply of purely public goods that are not excluded in individual consumption, for which it is impossible to set a price for an individual consumer.

Conclusion

In conditions of economic difficulties, the instrument of public-private partnership can and should contribute to the comprehensive improvement of the domestic economy. However, for this, first of all, it is necessary to create an effective system of contract information between the state and private partners. In turn, the basis for the formation of an effective public-private partnership management system should be the optimization of the right field.

This requires a clearer understanding of the essence of public-private partnership in the context of the mobilization orientation of the economy and the introduction of digitalization into everyday economic reality.

References
1. Ablyazov, T. Kh., & Marusin, A. V. (2019). Public-private partnership as a mechanism of the development of transport infrastructure in the conditions of the formation of the digital economy. Journal of International Economic Affairs, 9(2), 1271–1280. doi: 10.18334/eo.9.2.40593
2. Baranova, I. V., & Muradov, A. A. (2013). Tools for improving the efficiency of innovation activities of public-private partnership structures. Russian Journal of Innovation Economics, 3(1), 12–19.
3. Barbashina, E. A. (2021). The role of public-private partnership in managing the processes of innovative development of the Russian economy. Russian Journal of Innovation Economics, 11(1), 119–130. doi: 10.18334/vinec.11.1.111948
4. Brovchak, S. V., Smirnova, A. A., Zotov, I. A., Mingazov, A. R., & Golovko, A. D. (2022). Public-private partnership in the financial model of the social economy. Journal of Economics, entrepreneurship and law, 12(4), 1377–1392. doi:10.18334/epp.12.4.114477
5. Bukhvald, E. M. (2020). The legal framework of public-private partnerships in the context of implementation of national projects in the Russian Federation. Journal of Economics, entrepreneurship and law, 10(3), 503–516. doi:10.18334/epp.10.3.100564
6. Vavilina, A. V., Kirillova, O. Yu., & Malinovskaya, M. I. (2019). The role and prospects of public-private partnerships in developing regional infrastructure in Russia. Journal of International Economic Affairs, 9(2), 1255–1270. doi:10.18334/rp.20.5.40684
7. Kilinkarov, V. V., & Ponomarev, B. A. (2023). The civil Nature of public-private Partnership Agreements. Legal Studies, 2, 44–54. doi:10.25136/2409-7136.2023.2.38640
8. Kireeva, A. V. (2017). Public-Private Partnership in the sphere of control and coercion – a new element of the state mechanism. Administrative and municipal law, 4, 47–58. doi:10.7256/2454-0595.2017.4.22469
9. Kireeva, A. V., & Zolotareva, A. B. (2016). Public-private partnership in social sphere: analysis of the effectiveness of existing models. Law and Politics, 10, 1251–1257. doi:10.7256/1811-9018.2016.10.17079
10. Knyazev, Yu. K. (2022). New opportunities for public-private partnership in times of crisis. Economic security, 5(4), 1679–1692. doi:10.18334/ecsec. 5.4.116208
11. Maslova, S. V. (2019). The role of international organizations in regulating relations in the area of public-private partnership: critical analysis and prospects. International Law and International Organizations, 2, 1–15. doi:10.7256/2454-0633.2019.2.29970
12. Mendelos, E. (2017). Public-private partnership as a factor of "inclusive" political and economic development. Politics and Society, 2, 51–56. doi:10.7256/2454-0684.2017.2.21709
13. Abdul Latif, A. S., Azman Ali, N., Ishan, Z., Jaharuddin, N.S., Hassan, R., & Abdul Latif, A. (2023). Effects of Contract Governance on the Relation of Partnership Critical Success Factors and the Performance of Malaysia Public-Private Partnership Initiatives. Int. J. Financial Stud, 11, 109. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs11030109
14. Afieroho, U. E., Li, Y., Han, Y., Soomro, M. A., & Radujkovic, M. (2023). Transformational Community Engagement in Urban Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships: A Governmentality Approach to Create Social Value. Buildings, 13, 1225. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13051225
15. Castelblanco, G., Safari, P., & De Marco, A. (2023). Driving Factors of Concession Period in Healthcare Public Private Partnerships. Buildings, 13, 2452. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102452
16. Kitsai, Yu. A., Miroshnichenko, N. V., Morozova, I. A., & Leybert, T. B. (2023). The Game Approach to Utilizing the Public-Private Partnership Mechanism for Sustainable Development. Game Strategies for Business Integration in the Digital Economy (pp. 91–100). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
17. Li, Z., & Wang, H. (2023). Exploring Risk Factors Affecting Sustainable Outcomes of Global Public–Private Partnership (PPP) Projects: A Stakeholder Perspective. Buildings, 13, 2140. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13092140
18. Mazher, K. M., Chan, A. P. C., Choudhry, R. M., Zahoor, H., Edwards, D. J., Ghaithan, A. M., Mohammed, A., & Aziz, M. (2022). Identifying Measures of Effective Risk Management for Public–Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects in Developing Countries. Sustainability, 14, 14149. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114149
19. Miranda-Poggys, A. G., & Morena, M. (2023). A Critique on Public–Private–People Partnerships: From a Definitional Inconsistency to the Partnering Dilemma in Today’s Housing Conjunction. Sustainability, 15, 4859. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064859
20. Mohammed Abdelkader, E., Zayed, T., El Fathali, H., Alfalah, G., Al-Sakkaf, A., & Moselhi, O. (2023). An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for the Assessment of Public Private Partnerships in Transportation Projects. Mathematics, 11, 3559. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/math11163559
21. Mostafa, F., Elsayed, A. M., & Eid, M. S. et al. (2022). Towards fairly sharing risks in public-private partnership projects: Shapley value approach. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 7(5), 1–12. doi:10.1007/s41062-022-00920-x
22. Peng, S.-y. (2022). Public–Private Interactions in Privacy Governance. Laws, 11, 80. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/laws11060080
23. Weiss B. (Ed.). (1985). Public Private Partnerships: Financing a Common Wealth. Washington.
24. Rubtsova, N. V. Place of the public-private partnership in regulation of entrepreneurial activity in Russia. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt. Egyptology, 17(10), 1566–1576.
25. Shi, S., Zhao, F., Zhang, H., Li, H., & Ye, X. (2023). Research on the Influences of Task Interdependence on Team Performance in the Context of the Leader–Member Exchange Differentiation in the Public–Private Partnership Projects. Sustainability, 15, 13429. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813429
26. Song, Y., & Hao, S. (2023). Influence of Project Governance Mechanisms on the Sustainable Development of Public-Private Partnership Projects: An Empirical Study from China. Buildings, 13, 2424. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102424
27. Vaslavsky, Y. I., & Vaslavskaya, I. Y. (2021). Public-private partnership in the reality of the global COVID-19 societal crisis. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 650, 012046. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/650/1/012046
28. Zhang, H., Shi, S., Zhao, F., Ye, X., & Qi, H. (2023). A Study on the Impact of Team Interdependence on Cooperative Performance in Public–Private Partnership Projects: The Moderating Effect of Government Equity Participation. Sustainability, 15, 12684. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712684
29. Pankratov, A. A. (2008). Public-private partnership in modern practice: the main theoretical and practical problems. Monograph. Moscow: Ankil.
30. Gerrard, M. B. (2001). What are public-private partnerships, and how do they differ from privatizations? Finance & Development, 38(3), 17.
31. Varnavskiy, V. G. (2004). Alliance for a certain period. Feldpost, 029, 5.
32. Vilisov, M. V., Sulakshin, S. S., & Khrustaleva, Ye. A. (2005). Public-private partnership in the road sector. Problems of legal regulation of road activity in the Russian Federation. Moscow: Scientific expert.
33. Alpatov, A. A., Pushkin, A.V., & Japaridze, R. M. (2010). Public-private partnership: Mechanisms of implementation. Moscow: Alpina Publishers.
34. Drobot, E. V., Makarov, I. N., & Kazarova, D. S. (2023). Legal and organizational tools to ensure the development of public-private partnerships: current status and opportunities for improvement. Journal of Economics, entrepreneurship and law, 13(8), 2477–2490. doi:10.18334/epp.13.8.118415
35. Makarov, I. N., & Drygina, E. A. (2018). Ways to improve Russian regulatory and legal support for public-private partnership development. Russian Journal of Entrepreneurship, 19(1), 67–76. doi: 10.18334/rp.19.1.38765

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the research in the article submitted for review is, as its name implies, the category of public-private partnership in domestic legislation. It is recommended to specify the name of the work. Firstly, "category" is a fundamental, extremely general concept, traditionally used in relation to verified, well-established concepts in legal science. On the contrary, the concept of "public-private partnership" is relatively new and controversial. Secondly, the article examines not only the legal definition of the concept of "public-private partnership", but also the doctrinal ones. The methodology of the research is not disclosed in the text of the article, but it is obvious that the scientists used universal dialectical, logical, formal legal, hermeneutic, comparative legal research methods. The relevance of the research topic chosen by the author is justified as follows: "In our country, public-private partnership is officially associated with the 224-FZ adopted in 2015 (Federal Law "On Public-Private Partnership, Municipal-Private Partnership in the Russian Federation and Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation" dated 07/13/2015 No. 224-FZ). At the same time, it should be noted that the introduction of the public-private partnership system (hereinafter — PPP) into the Russian legal system (practice) has become one of the most important decisions taken by the Government to stimulate the country's economic growth. One of the main reasons for the widespread use of PPP is its potential to attract private sector financing in industries and activities under the jurisdiction and attention of the state"; "It must be recognized that the category of PPP is currently more widely developed in economic theory than in jurisprudence, which necessitates the need for case studies on this issue". Excessive attention is paid to revealing the degree of study of the phenomenon of public-private partnership in general. In this part, the introductory part of the work, which occupies almost 1/2 of the article, should be reduced (the introductory and final parts of the work should be approximately equal in volume). The scientific novelty of the study is manifested in a number of the author's conclusions ("1. Most domestic scientists who studied public-private partnership considered this socio-economic phenomenon separately, from the standpoint of property relations, systemic resource and institutional approaches. 2. Domestic and foreign researchers of public-private partnership has identified three fundamental criteria to uniquely identify the partnership as the project activities: a) availability of resources consolidation of the state represented by its authorized representative, and economic entity — a private sector representative; b) the presence of the mechanism of consolidation and redistribution of the totality of the risks involved in the project of public-private partnerships throughout its implementation; C) the presence of target mission is to generate significant public benefits, focus on providing companies with the necessary resources, having the character of public, mixed and mixed and communal benefits — that is, ward benefits") and proposed definitions of the concepts of "public-private partnership, municipal-private partnership," "the benefit of the ward": ""public-private partnership, municipal-private partnership legally for a certain period and is based on the pooling of resources, risk-sharing cooperation between the public partner, on the one hand, and the private partner, on the other hand, which is carried out on the basis of the agreement on public-private partnership agreements, municipal-private partnership concluded in accordance with this Federal law for attracting private investment to ensure the organs of state power and bodies of local self-government to fulfill its functions, which consists in the generation of socially significant goods, having the character of patronized goods"; "ward good" - "good, having the character of a pure public, mixed and mixed and communal benefits, key features of which are able to determine the price for an individual consumer, and the presence of private and public effect of individual consumption of this good." Thus, the article submitted for review makes a certain contribution to the development of domestic legal science and deserves the attention of the readership. The scientific style of the research is fully sustained by the author. The structure of the work is quite logical. In the introductory part of the article, the author substantiates the relevance of the chosen research topic and reveals the degree of study of the problems raised in the work. In the main part of the article, the scientist examines the essence, social, political and economic purpose of public-private partnership. Based on the analysis of the approaches proposed in the scientific literature and the current legislation, the author offers his definitions of the concepts of "public-private partnership, municipal-private partnership" and "patronized benefit". The final part of the article contains general conclusions based on the results of the study. The content of the article, as already noted, does not fully correspond to its title. It is also not without some other disadvantages. So, the author writes: "At the same time, it should be noted that the introduction of the public-private partnership system (hereinafter — PPP) into the Russian legal system (practice) has become one of the most important decisions taken by the Government to stimulate the economic growth of the country"; "However, the structuring of such PPPs is a jurisdictional and practical issue, and the legal framework must comply with the economic, social and financial goals of all participants in such a partnership." There is no concept of "legal system", but there are concepts of "legal system" and "legal system". The same applies to the "legal framework". Analyzing the definitions of the concept of "public-private partnership" proposed by some scientists, the author indicates the essential features of the phenomenon they study, but does not identify the shortcomings of the definitions proposed in the scientific literature. The scientist notes: "However, for this, first of all, it is necessary to create an effective system of contract information between the state and private partners." The use of Anglicisms should be avoided if there is an appropriate analogue in Russian. The bibliography of the study is presented by 35 sources (scientific articles), including in English. From a formal and factual point of view, this is quite enough. The nature and number of sources used in writing the article allowed the author to reveal the research topic with the necessary depth and completeness. There is an appeal to opponents, both general and private (M. B. Gerrard and A. Pankratov, V. Varnavsky, M. Vilisov, E. Dynin, etc.), and it is quite sufficient. The scientific discussion is conducted by the author correctly. The provisions of the work are justified to the necessary extent. There are conclusions based on the results of the study ("In conditions of economic difficulties, the instrument of public-private partnership can and should contribute to the comprehensive improvement of the domestic economy. However, for this, first of all, it is necessary to create an effective system of contract information between the state and private partners. In turn, the basis for the formation of an effective public-private partnership management system should be the optimization of the right field. This requires a clearer understanding of the essence of public-private partnership in the context of the mobilization orientation of the economy and the introduction of digitalization into everyday economic reality"), but they are general in nature and do not reflect all the scientific achievements of the author, and therefore need to be clarified. The article must be carefully read. It contains typos, spelling, syntactic and stylistic errors.
The interest of the readership in the article submitted for review can be shown primarily by specialists in the field of civil law and business law, provided that it is finalized: disclosure of the research methodology, correction of the introductory part of the work, clarification of the terminology used, concretization of conclusions based on the results of the study, elimination of violations in the design of the work.

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the study. The subject of the research of the reviewed article "The need to clarify the understanding of the category of public-private partnership in domestic legislation" is the norms of law governing public relations in the field of public-private partnership. Research methodology. The methodological apparatus of this article consists of modern general and particular techniques and methods of scientific cognition (abstraction, induction, deduction, hypothesis, analogy, synthesis, modeling, typology, classification, systematization, generalization, etc.). The author paid great attention to the application of the method of comparative jurisprudence. The relevance of research. The relevance of the topic of the article is explained by the introduction of a public-private partnership system into Russian legal practice in order to stimulate economic growth in our country, use the potential to attract financing by private individuals (legal entities and individuals) in the public sector of the economy. The development of this type of public relations, the formation of their legal regulation needs scientific understanding. Scientific novelty. Undoubtedly, the reviewed article has scientific novelty, some reasoned conclusions of the author were made for the first time in domestic jurisprudence, for example, on the creation of an effective system of contract information between the state and private partners, the introduction of digitalization into daily business activities. Style, structure, content. In general, the article is written in a scientific style, the author uses special legal terminology. The author's position on the distinction between the concepts of "public-private partnership" and "public-private partnership" is not entirely clear. Offering the author's definition, "public-private partnership mixes these concepts. It should be clarified. The article is logically structured. The material is presented consistently and, in general, competently. The article reveals the stated topic in its content. However, the conclusions in the conclusion made by the author are too general, although the research conducted by him allows us to formulate the results more specifically. As a technical and avoidable remark, it can be pointed out that repetitions of the use of words occur in the text of the article in sentences (for example, ... systems...systems...). Bibliography. The author has used a sufficient number of bibliographic sources, including publications of recent years. The links to the sources are designed correctly. Appeal to opponents. There is a scientific controversy in the text of the article. An overview of the points of view on the problems stated by the author is presented. Addressing opponents is correct. However, in some references to the names of other scientists, there is a violation of the order. It is necessary to indicate the initials first, and then the surname of the scientist (a technical remark). Conclusions, the interest of the readership. The reviewed article "The need to clarify the understanding of the category of public-private partnership in domestic legislation" is recommended for publication, since it meets the established requirements, its topic is relevant, has practical significance and contains elements of scientific novelty. This article corresponds to the editorial policy of the scientific journal "Law and Politics". The article may be of interest to a wide readership, primarily specialists in the field of civil, business, and digital law, as well as teachers and students of law schools and faculties.