Relevance. Public-private partnership (PPP) is considered as a priority in Kazakhstan's state policy for achieving strategic plans, fostering political stability, and boosting the economy by attracting private investment in key sectors. Thus, studying the PPP issues and prospects is vital, necessitating a comprehensive economic perspective and integration with other societal spheres of public life. Purpose. The study aims to explore the political aspect of PPP development in Kazakhstan and seeks to assess the extent of influence exerted by various factors on the PPP mechanism. Additionally, the study intends to identify measures for enhancing the PPP framework, with particular attention to the relative importance of factors impacting its progress. Methodology. The study's empirical basis involved a PEST analysis of PPP issues, utilizing expert questionnaires from 5 political scientists, 5 economists, 5 sociologists, and 5 technology specialists. An expert survey with scaling estimates was conducted, followed by an analysis of these assessments. Results. The results of the study reveal ways to enhance the PPP mechanism by examining the specific impacts of political, economic, social, and technological factors. The study is theoretically grounded in neocorporatism, which advocates for the systematic involvement of interest groups in shaping state policies that connect government and business entities. The hypothesis was tested by evaluating the influence of these factors on PPP development, identifying key challenges, and outlining future prospects for PPPs in Kazakhstan. Conclusions. Based on the findings of the PEST analysis, it is evident that updating the legislative framework to align with current requirements is crucial for enhancing the efficiency of PPP initiatives. Improving PPP project quality necessitates prioritizing projects addressing fundamental societal needs and critical issues.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bayan Akhatay (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: