PPP Methodological Approach
Within the framework of Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects, Arpinge has always carefully analysed the nature and characteristics of the two categories of actors involved, both public and private, taking care of evaluating both economic and organizational, as well as, reputational profiles.
With regards to private counterparties, the objective pursued is to reduce as far as possible conflicts of interest between the various actors and promoters of the project, aiming at achieving equilibrium and commercial fairness among them. To this end, Arpinge conducts rigorous evaluations of the structure of the operation and of its fundamental characteristics, aiming at identifying a governance system and further protection mechanisms, which allow the maximum alignment of interests between the various private counterparties involved.
For public counterparties, Arpinge’s rigorous and careful approach requires selecting projects through a preliminary analysis that must necessarily start from the main public actors involved in the operation (typically the municipal administrations). The screening of these subjects not only looks at their profiles of financial reliability (ECAI ratings) but also, and above all, at elements of transparency and efficiency, aiming at verifying the possibility of operating within a context based on the formal and substantial correctness of relationships between administrations and private promoters. In this regard in order to draw up its own assessments and merit rankings, Arpinge uses all the information available as well as alternative rating systems, such as the data published on the web platform “Rating Comuni Italiani” and the analyses on the “Public Rating” formulated by the Fondazione Etica (www.fondazionetica.it/) that are based on data that the public administration is required to publish according to the Legislative Decree No. 33/2013 and Legislative Decree 97/2016.
The results of these analyses, once verified and validated also on the field, allow the identification of the most favourable contexts for institutional investors, which is the prerequisite for the evaluation of possible investment opportunities. It is significant that these analyses, since the start of the Arpinge activity, have led to the decision that some important municipalities, including metropolitan areas (and unfortunately the Capital), are not eligible as counterparties for PPP operations. This decision has been taken because, regardless of the alternation Board meetings, the ineligible municipalities have shown unacceptable deficiencies and inefficiencies within their administrative processes and relevant reputational issues.