Abstract
The provision of infrastructure is crucial for driving economic growth in South Africa, but the country faces significant challenges in delivering these services, leading to widespread protests and negative economic consequences. In response, South Africa has adopted Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) as a key strategy in addressing socio-economic, political, and fiscal challenges. The Department of Correctional Services (DCS) has also implemented PPPs for infrastructure development and project delivery to reduce overcrowding, provide financial relief, and achieve strategic objectives. Notable examples include the Kutama-Sinthumule and Mangaung Correctional Centres, which provided financial relief and assisted with infrastructure provision. Despite the success of PPPs in addressing infrastructure needs within the DCS, security breaches and operational instability persist. This study examines the effectiveness of PPPs in infrastructure provision within the DCS. A qualitative mono-method approach was employed, using semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with 17 respondents from the DCS in Tshwane. Thematic analysis, through NVivo 12 software, was used to identify themes that highlight the effectiveness of PPPs within the department. The findings revealed a significant lack of oversight and limited experience in managing PPPs within the DCS. The study recommends an urgent need for the government to strengthen the legislative framework and implement robust monitoring tools to prevent opportunistic behaviour, enhance transparency, and improve accountability in PPP projects.
1 Introduction
A Public-Private Partnership (PPP) is a broad procurement model where the public and private sectors collaborate on assets, services, and financing (Ferk and Ferk, 2021). Through PPPs, the public sector seeks to leverage the expertise, resources, and capabilities of private partners while sharing risks to enhance infrastructure (Seema and Kibuuka, 2017). For the private sector, these partnerships create valuable investment opportunities (Nallathiga, 2022). Typically, the private partner assumes significant risks related to financing, construction, operation, and maintenance, while the public partner manages regulatory risks and compensates for services provided (Fouad, 2021; Tallaki and Bracci, 2021). This approach helps alleviate financial pressures on fiscally constrained governments by relying primarily on private sector funding (Mabuza, 2017; Fouad, 2021). Such financial backing enables governments to efficiently acquire, build, and manage new infrastructure projects (Eelis, 2020). Globally, PPPs have become essential mechanisms, allowing governments to partner with private companies through management contracts to deliver effective public infrastructure (Nuwagaba et al., 2022). This approach has proven successful in both developed and developing nations, supporting essential public services and contributing to economic growth (Khatleli, 2020a).
South Africa, following global trends, has embraced Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) to tackle its complex socio-economic, political, fiscal, and societal issues (Gumede, 2018; Chiswa, 2024). This includes using PPPs for infrastructure development and alleviating overcrowding in the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), leveraging a Design, Construct, Finance, Operate, and Maintain model. Overcrowding poses significant risks to the safety and security of both inmates and staff, as increased inmate-to-staff ratios often escalate tensions and frustration over living conditions (Department of Correctional Services, 2022). By using this globally adopted approach, South Africa addresses rising inmate populations amidst constrained funding for new facilities (Ntsobi, 2024). A study by Fombad (2014) showed that measures have to be taken to improve accountability in South African PPPs if their reputed benefits can be fully enjoyed. Almeile et al. (2024) also reiterated that although PPPs are an innovative policy tool that is maleable for different situations and applications, weaknesses in governance could work against some of the strengths of this procurement method. This means that there has to be an intimate appreciation of how a critical sector such as correctional services are assisted or otherwise by PPPs (Cox and Osterhoff, 2023).
The insights from the above studies, however, highlight critical challenges and interventions within Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), particularly in contexts such as correctional centres. The examination of the ‘step-in’ clause in South African correctional centres as a remedial mechanism for instance underscores its crucial role in safeguarding government interests and maintaining operational continuity during crises (Khatleli, 2016). While the clause is effective, its reactive nature-being activated only after contractual breaches or operational instability-raises concerns about the adequacy of proactive measures to prevent such issues (Khatleli, 2016).
Although extensive research has been conducted both locally and internationally on the nature and structure of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), there is a notable gap in studies assessing their effectiveness in infrastructure provision within Correctional Services. Comprehensive evaluations of PPPs in South Africa’s correctional centres remain limited. The aim of the study is to explore the effectiveness of PPPs in the Correctional Services context in South Africa. This aim is operationalized by two objectives, namely, 1) to analyze the realities of PPPs implementation in the correctional services and 2) to assess the performance insights brought about by PPPs.
2 Literature review
This investigation encompasses the challenges encountered during the implementation of PPPs, as well as the key operational expectations established by stakeholders within the Department of Correctional Services. Ultimately, the study seeks to determine the unique benefits that PPPs offer, which are not achievable through traditional procurement methods.
2.1 Public private partnerships (PPPs) from a global perspective
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) have gained global prominence, offering governments a practical way to collaborate with private companies through management contracts to deliver public infrastructure more efficiently (Nuwagaba et al., 2022). In recent decades, PPPs have been widely adopted to develop critical infrastructure such as roads, correctional facilities, schools, railways, sewerage systems, and power plants, earning significant international recognition (Demirag, 2018). Particularly in developing countries, PPPs are seen as a viable alternative to traditional funding methods (Nuwagaba et al., 2022). Nevertheless, their implementation has not always been straightforward, and many countries have had to refine their strategies to enhance the effectiveness of these partnerships (Seeletse, 2016).
The concept and definition of PPPs vary across countries, shaped by distinct legislative frameworks and strategic priorities (Adebayo et al., 2023). For example, in Australia, PPPs are known as Private Finance Projects, while in the United Kingdom, they are termed Privately Financed Initiatives (Tallaki and Bracci, 2021). South Africa defines PPPs as collaborations formally registered with and approved by the National Treasury (Leigland, 2020). Despite these variations, the common goal remains leveraging the strengths of various stakeholders to improve public service delivery (Ndou, 2021; Ndlovu, 2023).
PPPs offer numerous benefits, notably by enabling governments to fill infrastructure gaps more effectively through access to private sector expertise, technological innovations, and financial resources (Alamu et al., 2024). They promote optimal resource allocation, accelerate construction timelines, and support technological advancements in infrastructure development (Singh and Nayyar, 2024). However, PPPs also present several challenges (Chileshe et al., 2023). Ethical conflicts often arise due to differing values between the public and private sectors (Sewsankar, 2024; Wilson, 2022), while issues such as weak governance, lack of transparency, and unequal decision-making participation can undermine partnership success (Nuhu et al., 2020).
Moreover, risks are inherent in PPP arrangements (Akhtar et al., 2023). These risks include relational issues, where partners may act opportunistically, and performance risks, such as failures in service delivery or cost overruns (Galvin et al., 2021). Ideally, the transfer of certain risks to the private sector helps governments achieve better value for money and improves project efficiency (Chao and Farrier, 2022). Nonetheless, the private sector may at times seek to shift unfavorable risks back to the public sector, complicating the intended balance of responsibilities (Williams and Clarke, 2022).
2.2 Public private partnerships (PPPs) from a South African perspective
As mentioned earlier, South Africa has embraced PPPs as a crucial strategy to address its deep-rooted socio-economic, political, fiscal, and societal challenges (Gumede, 2018). These partnerships not only facilitate the achievement of both national and international development project goals but also align with global best practices while adhering to local regulatory requirements (Horan, 2022).
To date, South Africa has successfully completed 34 PPP projects, totaling R 89.3 billion in value (Kwofie et al., 2019). Among these completed projects is the construction of two correctional centres in the Limpopo and Free State provinces, which have contributed to effective project delivery (Department of Correctional Services, 2021). Despite various challenges that have emerged over the years, these Public-Private Partnerships have proven successful within the country (National Treasury, 2021).
South Africa employs several PPP models, including the Design, Finance, and Operate (DFO) model; the Design, Finance, Build, Operate, and Transfer (DFBOT) model; the Design and Transfer (DT) model; the Build, Operate, and Transfer (BOT) model; and equity partnerships (Treasury Regulation 16, 2004). Although these models offer distinct advantages, PPP partners continue to encounter significant challenges in executing their projects (Xu and Chang, 2017).
2.3 Challenges of PPP correctional centres in South Africa
The implementation of Public-Private Partnership (PPP) correctional centres in South Africa has introduced notable benefits, particularly in infrastructure development (Khatleli, 2020b). These partnerships have enabled the construction and operation of modern facilities that may not have been feasible through traditional public sector funding alone (Gleeson et al., 2019).
However, the model is not without its challenges. Key concerns include potentially weak monitoring mechanisms, unexpectedly high costs incurred by the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), and disparities in service levels between PPP-run and traditional correctional facilities (Khatleli, 2020a). Notably, the cost per inmate in PPP facilities is reported to be nearly double that of those housed in state-run centres (Department of Correctional Services, 2023).
More alarmingly, serious allegations of inmate mistreatment have surfaced within PPP correctional centres (Delmas, 2025). These include the forced injection of inmates with antipsychotic medication and the use of electroshock devices to enforce compliance (Hopkins, 2013). In one particularly damaging incident, a high-profile prison escape severely undermined the state’s authority. Investigations by the Department of Correctional Services (Department of Correctional Services, 2023) uncovered multiple security breaches-among them, direct assistance provided to the escapee and the unauthorized entry of a private vehicle, which was believed to have transported a body later found burned beyond recognition.
These incidents point to systemic governance failures within PPP-operated facilities and highlight the urgent need for more robust oversight, transparent accountability mechanisms, and strengthened risk management frameworks to prevent further abuses and to safeguard the integrity of correctional services.
The responsibility for external oversight of privately operated correctional centres primarily rests with DCS-appointed controllers (Department of Correctional Services, 2022). However, there is growing concern about the effectiveness of this oversight (Department of Correctional Services, 2021). DCS reports suggest that some controllers may become too closely integrated with the private operator’s staff and operations, thereby compromising their independence (Department of Correctional Services, 2022). This blurring of lines between oversight and administration raises questions about the objectivity and effectiveness of monitoring in PPP correctional centres (Department of Correctional Services, 2022).
3 Research and methodology
This study explored the effectiveness of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in delivering infrastructure within South Africa’s correctional centres. To address this aim, a qualitative exploratory case study design was employed, with a specific focus on the Department of Correctional Services (DCS). A total of 23 individuals across six key directorates-Construction Project Management, Contracts Management, Facilities Management, Legal Services, Security Services, and Professional Services-were initially identified as potential participants. However, only 17 individuals were ultimately available for interviews. Data was gathered through semi-structured interviews with these 17 participants, all of whom were based at the DCS national office in Pretoria. The sample included four project managers, three architects, two engineers, three security services representatives, two contract management specialists, and three senior managers. A non-probability purposive sampling technique was employed to select respondents, consistent with the study’s exploratory and interpretive nature.
The interviews were structured to align with each respondent’s professional role within the DCS and were conducted both in person at the Pretoria offices and remotely via online platforms for respondents based at the Limpopo/Mpumalanga/Northwest (LMN) and Free State/Northern Cape (FS/NC) regional offices, where the two PPP correctional facilities are located. The interview schedule was divided into five sections: Section A captured respondent profiles, while Sections B, C, D, and E addressed the core research objectives. These five research objectives are as follows:
To investigate the operational expectations associated with the introduction of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs).
To assess performance insights generated through the implementation of PPPs.
To analyze the practical realities of PPP implementation in the correctional services context.
To investigate past misgivings regarding the performance of correctional centres.
To consolidate the lessons learned from PPP benefits that are considered “unmeetable” through traditional procurement methods.
Finally, thematic analysis was employed using NVivo 12 to identify, analyze, and report patterns and themes emerging from the qualitative data.
4 Findings and discussions
As previously indicated, 17 respondents participated in this study, all of whom possessed valuable knowledge about Public-Private Partnerships within the Department of Correctional Services. The 17 interviewees were labelled R1 to R17, with R1 representing the first respondent, R2 the second, and so on. The analysis of the findings related to the study’s objectives is presented in Tables 1–7 below.
TABLE 1
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Overcrowding | The reason behind the establishment of the PPPs was for DCS to reduce overcrowding within its traditional correctional centres Risk transfer to private entity | 8 |
Overcrowding.
TABLE 2
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Project delivery | PPP procurement strategy delivers projects quicker than traditional procurement strategy | 17 |
Project delivery.
TABLE 3
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Resources | High quality standards Advanced technology Effective programmes | 16 |
Resources.
TABLE 4
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Transparency | Stakeholder engagement A lack of oversight from DCS | 16 |
| Legislative framework | Strengthening of legislative framework Lack of monitoring from DCS | 11 |
Transparency and legislative framework.
TABLE 5
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| PPP experience | DCS lacks PPP experience Lack of expertise and capacity Lack of understanding PPP process | 14 |
PPP experience.
TABLE 6
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of funds | Budget constraints on DCS Financial relief on DCS High costs of traditional procurement due to project delays | 12 |
Lack of funds.
TABLE 7
| Themes | Findings/Results | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | Quicker procurement processes management | 13 |
Effectiveness.
4.1 Objective 1: to investigate the operational expectations from PPP introduction
This objective aims to investigate the operational expectations that the government, particularly the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), holds regarding the establishment of PPP correctional centres in South Africa, along with the key themes that emerged from this investigation.
Most of the respondents indicated that the two PPP correctional centres at DCS have significantly alleviated overcrowding, accommodating 5,953 inmates serving maximum sentences. They indicated that,
“This centre accommodates offenders that are serving life/maximum sentences. The two PPP correctional facilities brought a relief to DCS, by assisting DCS to reduce overcrowding within its correctional facilities. The large number of inmate population is also caused by illegal immigrants” (R1).
“The two PPPs have been very helpful in assisting our department to reduce the high number of offenders within our facilities. These centres are currently housing more than 5,000 maximum offenders” (R3).
The responses from the interviewees were generally consistent with each other and which showed that PPPs have successfully addressed overcrowding issues. According to Department of Correctional Services (2023), since the introduction of PPPs in South Africa’s Correctional Centres, the government has experienced some relief in financing, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining infrastructure for the privately managed correctional centres under review, specifically Mangaung and Kutama Sinthumule Correctional Centres). This indicates that the operational expectations of PPPs have been met by reducing overcrowding at the correctional centres.
However, respondents also pointed out some operational challenges, particularly concerning security breaches. Issues such as the ill-treatment of inmates and escape attempts were noted. These concerns highlight that the primary challenge with PPPs relates to operational aspects, especially regarding ethical behaviour and contract or security breaches.
It is very crucial for the Department of Correctional Services to deliver projects on time, within budget and quality. This will help the department to carry out its operations and fulfil constitutional mandate. The Department of Correctional Services initiated a few projects using the traditional procurement approach (Mohlala, 2017). However, the projects failed for several reasons, primarily due to inadequate project management across all ten areas of project management philosophy (Mohlala, 2017). Key factors contributing to project failures include poor management of costs, time, scope, and quality. One significant issue was the liquidation of contractors, which led to lengthy delays in procuring and replacing them, ultimately resulting in overspending of the allocated budget for the projects (Department of Correctional Services, 2017). Project managers and engineers provided the following responses regarding these facilities.
“Parys correctional Facility was left abandoned by the contractor in 2019 and as a result, the project was cancelled in 2023, and the new contractor was appointed to continue with the construction work. The facility would have accommodated 250 inmates and reduced overcrowding within DCS Free State and Northern Cape Regions. When it comes to project delivery, PPPs are definitely doing a marvellous job” (R5).
“When it comes to PPPs, the procurement strategy turns out to be quicker than the traditional method. This makes it easy to procure services/resources faster and deliver the project” (R13).
The views of the respondents regarding the project delivery indicate that there is slow progress and poor performance when it comes to project delivery within DCS. The slow progress in project delivery makes it difficult for the DCS to reduce overcrowding and to fulfil the constitutional mandate strategic goals, which is to rehabilitate and reintegrate the offenders into society. In contrast, the PPPs shows good performance when it comes to project delivery as compared to the normal/traditional procurement approach that is used in South Africa. The timely delivery of projects, as specified in the contract is one of the benchmarks for measuring a successful project (Mukuka et al., 2015).
4.2 Objective 2: to assess performance insights brought about by PPPs
This objective aims to assess the performance-related insights derived from the implementation of Public-Private Partnership (PPP) correctional centres in South Africa, with a focus on their effectiveness, efficiency, and service delivery outcomes.
Regarding the objective of assessing performance insights from Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), respondents highlighted the effectiveness of PPPs in project delivery. They noted that PPPs leverage advanced resources, modern technology, and high-quality standards, alongside sufficient funding for infrastructure projects. Compared to traditional procurement methods, PPPs demonstrate superior efficiency, with projects typically completed on time and within budget due to the private sector’s expertise in project management.
The respondents have also highlighted that the PPPs have also contributed to higher quality standards in infrastructure provision. The private sector’s involvement often introduces cutting-edge technology and innovative practices, enhancing the overall quality of projects. This technological advancement has led to improved project delivery and increased user satisfaction, improved management and operational practices in PPP projects. Some respondents expressed the following sentiments.
“Indeed, our private partners are using more advanced resources to run the correctional facilities. You can see how the Mangaung and Kutama-Sinthumule were well designed. The resources that are being used at this facility are of higher and quality standard” (R10).
“Some of the resources like, security system, IT, kitchen standards, and skills development resources are way above the ones we have at our traditional correctional facilities. They are of high standards and quality. But DCS will have challenges when they take over these PPPs when the contract comes to an end. DCS will have to match the existing standard to the existing facilities and do continual improvement. And, to keep up with the improving technology, when it comes to security and information technology” (R12).
The findings are supported by literature, whereby Khatleli (2020a) highlights that the PPP approach is one of the strategies that have produced the fruits of success for many developed and developing countries in delivering public infrastructural services use to boost the country’s economic growth.
However, despite these advantages, PPPs face challenges related to contract management and coordination between public (DCS) and private entities. Issues such as misaligned objectives and complex contractual arrangements can impact performance. Despite the advantages of PPP projects in South Africa, several challenges have emerged over the years. These include a decline in private sector investment and a lack of government initiative and trust in the private sector, which have led to delays and cancellations of some projects (Nel, 2020). Nevertheless, PPPs hold the potential for delivering long-term benefits and sustainability, as the private sector’s commitment to maintaining and operating projects often results in superior long-term outcomes and maintenance standards.
Lastly, while the performance insights gained from PPPs generally lead to significant improvements in project delivery, quality, and efficiency, they also present challenges that require careful management. The overall impact of PPPs on performance is positive, with notable benefits including enhanced risk management, innovation, and cost efficiency.
4.3 Objective 3: to analyze the realities of PPPs implementation
This objective aims to analyse the practical realities and challenges encountered during the implementation of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in South African correctional centres.
According to Fombad (2017), transparency involves the public’s unrestricted access to timely and reliable information regarding decisions and performance in the public sector. In theory, Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are legally binding and generally standardized contracts designed to enhance transparency concerning performance, costs, risks, timelines, and output specifications (Qordja, 2021).
These contracts exhibited significant flaws, including a lack of transparency, a weak legislative framework, and inadequate oversight and monitoring by the Department of Correctional Services (DCS). Respondents also noted that Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are often associated with high costs and residual risks. Specific risks linked to PPPs include differing intentions between public and private sectors, varying standards of “good” governance, a lack of accountability, cultural conflicts, and asymmetric information (Keers and van Fenema, 2018). While the legislative framework has been modified and improved, issues such as unethical behaviour and insufficient monitoring by the DCS persist. One of the respondents indicated that,
“There remains a lack of transparency in terms of costs and stakeholder engagement related to PPPs, most people are concerned about the costs that are associated with PPPs and the level of stakeholder engagement” (R11).
“The step-in clause is the perfect clause that is being used to bring order at the correctional facilities. Although the department has this clause, the problem is that it takes place after the events have occurred. There should be a modified mechanism which allows well-structured monitoring from the DCS side. It is improper to rely on the information from the private party. The legislative framework needs to be modified so that our department can have its monitoring tools and not rely on the private partner. All the escapes and ill-treatment of inmates can be avoided if the framework can be monitored” (R16).
According to the National Treasury (2008) standardised PPP provisions, a “step-in” right allows the public institution to intervene in a PPP arrangement either in the event of a breach by the private party or, in certain circumstances, even in the absence of a breach. The latter may occur when the private party voluntarily requests the institution to assume temporary control due to challenges in meeting specific service-level outcomes. Section 112 of the Correctional Services Act further outlines conditions for such intervention. It authorises the National Commissioner, in consultation with the Minister, to appoint a Temporary Manager to oversee a PPP correctional facility if it is determined that the Director (a custodial official appointed by the private contractor) has lost or is likely to lose effective control, or where it is necessary to ensure safety and security. In such cases, correctional officials may replace private custody personnel to the extent required.
Despite regulatory provisions intended to enable institutional oversight, significant challenges persist. As Khatleli (2015) observes, although substantial efforts have been made to strengthen PPP legislation and promote a transparent procurement framework, the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) continues to experience security breaches and unethical practices, even within the context of established PPP concessions (Khatleli, 2020a). Oversight mechanisms within the DCS appear insufficient, enabling conditions such as information asymmetry and opportunistic behaviour to persist. These challenges raise concerns about governance capacity and the sustainability of PPP arrangements within South Africa’s correctional sector.
The realities around PPP arrangements are that they are long-term contracts that carry significant financial risks, reputational concerns, and ethical considerations. One of the respondents indicated that.
“PPPs are long term contractual agreements; basically, DCS entered into a long-term agreement with a private entity without any previous experience or enough knowledge. It is always a risk to enter into a long-term contractual agreement without any experience/lessons learned from previous agreements of similar nature. It is difficult to see the loopholes or shortfalls that may occur which may erode public trust or have financial implications” (R16).
The respondents highlighted that the Department of Correctional Services' (DCS) lack experience in managing Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). The findings revealed that DCS entered into long-term contractual agreements without prior experience in PPPs. These projects tend to be costly and involve lengthy procurement processes, necessitating substantial expertise in identifying suitable PPP projects, selecting the right private partners, as well as effectively managing risks and stakeholders (Mazher et al., 2022). One respondent also added that.
“The long-term contracts make it difficult for one party to exit the contract. This happens in a situation whereby one party is not happy with the other party’s performance. It can be breach of contract by the other party, poor performance or unethical behaviour. There are many factors that may affect the contractual agreement” (R4).
The responses indicate that exiting the agreement may be challenging for the affected party due to the nature of the contract. Exit clauses within PPP contracts typically involve financial liabilities, making it difficult for dissatisfied parties to terminate the agreement, as they would be responsible for incurring substantial costs. Increased private involvement in infrastructure projects may be advantageous; however, such projects may become confined by poorly planned contracts. Such contracts can either involve exorbitant or very low compensation to the agent considering their endeavours and risk bearing (Owolabi et al., 2019). Therefore, it is essential for the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) to engage highly experienced advisors who can provide valuable insights based on the successful implementation of PPP projects in correctional facilities in developed countries.
4.4 Objective 4: to investigate the past misgivings about the traditional correctional centre’s performance
This objective aims to explore historical concerns and criticisms regarding the performance of correctional centres prior to the adoption of PPPs in South Africa.
According to Khatleli (2015), the model in procurement serves as a viable solution to ease the burden on financially strained or conservative governments by relying primarily on private sector financing. This approach becomes particularly valuable in situations where the government’s fiscal space is limited or its capability to execute large-scale infrastructure projects is restricted (Khatleli, 2020b). Infrastructure development needs proper planning and budget allocation (Nasri et al., 2022). Lack of funding and reduced allocation funds/budget can be one of the contributing factors towards the poor infrastructure development (Das, 2022). Reduced funding from the National Treasury makes it difficult for DCS to build a new correctional centre and to refurbish some of the dilapidated facilities (Department of Correctional Services, 2021). One of the respondents indicated that,
“Some of the planned projects within the department were not allocated funds for the current financial year. Therefore, the department will have to wait for the new financial year/budget allocation to fund this planned projects. in return, this affects the departments plan to refurbish and upgrade some of the existing correctional centres” (R12).
“Building of new correctional facilities requires huge capital, which is not readily available. It is a challenge to get funds to build a new correctional facility. Most of the budget within DCS goes to maintenance, repairs and renovations. Most of the facilities were built more than 50 years ago and they need funds to be revamped/refurbished” (R2).
The findings reveal that the private sector possesses the financial capacity to construct correctional facilities, allowing the government to transfer the risk of project delays or failure to deliver new infrastructure. This risk transfer, facilitated through the implementation of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), helps address the issue of overcrowded correctional facilities. Limited funding and reduced budget allocations make it challenging to initiate or implement new projects using traditional procurement methods. The introduction of PPPs has provided financial relief to both the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) and the government. The findings also indicate that traditional correctional centres are financially burdensome, often incurring high costs without delivering satisfactory results in terms of rehabilitation and reintegration. Additionally, the lack of modern technology in these facilities hampers efforts to improve security, streamline operations, and support rehabilitation programs.
4.5 Objective 5: to consolidate the lessons on PPPs benefits that cannot be achieved through traditionally procured facilities
This objective seeks to consolidate the key lessons learned from the benefits of PPPs, particularly those considered unattainable through traditional procurement methods in the correctional services sector.
Since implementing Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in South Africa’s Correctional Centres, the government has experienced a reduction in financial pressures associated with the financing, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of privately managed facilities, notably the Mangaung and Kutama-Sinthumule Correctional Centres (Department of Correctional Services, 2023). Respondents expressed the view that the procurement mechanism of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) is faster than the traditional procurement methods currently employed in South Africa. However, despite the advantages associated with PPPs, partners often face challenges during project operations. The private entity is responsible for managing the daily operations of the correctional centre, with limited oversight from the government. Consequently, respondents believe that the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) should be more involved in the operations of PPP correctional centres. Some respondents expressed the following sentiments.
“They seem to be effective in general, but the issue here is that DCS is not involved in the operations of the facility, this put DCS at a very difficult situation. That is why we see the issues of escapes and inmates being treated badly. The recent invocation of a “step-in” clause Mangaung Correctional Centre is regarded as a proof that private partners are not suitable to manage the correctional facilities in South Africa. DCS should form part of the operations at the facilities, private party cannot be left to work alone” (R14).
“You should remember that during the escape situation in one of the correctional facilities, there was public outcry regarding the performance of this PPPs and value for money. The Public expected the Mangaung contract to be cancelled, but cancelling the contract is not in the interest of both government and G4S.in this scenario, it means that the government would still be liable to pay off the bond to the lenders as agreed in the contract. This is hold-up type of a situation, where is difficult for DCS to exit the contract” (R2).
“The centres look to be effective in project delivery, but the main challenge is with regard to human behaviour or ethics, somehow this human behaviour makes people to question the effectiveness of these two facilities” (R9).
The views shared by the respondents is that the procurement mechanism of the PPPs is quicker than the traditional procurement method that is being utilized in South Africa. However, despite the positive benefits associated with PPPs, partners involved often encounter challenges during project operations. The private entity manages the daily operations of the correctional centre and there is little oversight from the government. Lastly, the respondents are of the view that DCS needs to be part of the operations at the PPP correctional centres.
5 Conclusion
The study has revealed that Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) have proven to be effective in infrastructure provision within the South African Correctional Services. Both the literature and interview findings highlight the successes of PPPs, showcasing their achievements not only globally but also specifically within the Department of Correctional Services in South Africa. The insights brought about by PPPs is that they come with innovative technologies and effective programmes. However, the reality of PPP implementation is that unethical behaviour and contract breaches by the private partner continue to persist. PPPs require robust frameworks, transparency, and effective management, as they are long-term contracts that come with significant costs.
6 Recommendations
The concept of Public-Private Partnership (PPPs) is relatively new in South Africa particularly in the DCS context, thus necessitating further research to establish their effectiveness in delivering services and infrastructure. The PPP correctional centres achieved the immediate needs they were operationalised for, which were fiscal relief and management streamlining. They were effective in providing well-run facilities that could compete with any in delivering humane incarceration. However, it was established in addressing the first objective on the realities of implementing PPPs that the DCS did not prepare well in order to enable effective management of the PPP contracts. An imbalance in the understanding of management practices-particularly those favoring the private sector-impeded the ability to ensure the smooth and efficient monitoring of the facilities. The government is now in a better position in understanding how a contract could be devised that provides a better fit with the South African context. The Department of Correctional Services and government should introduce robust monitoring tools to ensure transparency and ethical conduct throughout the PPP operations. Furthermore, the PPP framework should be revised to enhance monitoring and prevent contract breaches among parties involved. Given limited literature on the effectiveness of PPPs in infrastructure provision at the Department of Correctional Services, future studies should focus on specific solutions to mitigate unethical behaviour and improve transparency. Additionally, future studies should explore practical solutions for improving the management and implementation of PPPs, particularly from the procurement stage onward.
7 Practical implications
Findings from the study can guide policymakers at the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) and broader government structures in refining PPP policies. Clearer guidelines and improved frameworks for contract management, performance monitoring, and risk-sharing in PPPs could be developed to enhance service delivery.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by Department of Correctional Services and University of Witwatersrand. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
MM: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing. NK: Supervision, Writing – review and editing.
Funding
The authors declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The authors declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
AdebayoA. A.LulofsK.HeldewegM. A. (2023). Indicators, strategies, and rule settings for sustainable public–private infrastructure partnerships: from literature review towards institutional designs. Sustainability15 (12), 9422. 10.3390/su15129422
2
AkhtarM.MuftiN. A.MubinS.SaleemM. Q.ZahoorS.UllahS. (2023). Identification of various execution modes and their respective risks for public–private partnership (PPP) infrastructure projects. Buildings13 (8), 1889. 10.3390/buildings13081889
3
AlamuO. I.HassanA. O.AsaK. J.OdunayoH. A. (2024). Addressing infrastructure deficits through public-private partnership funding of public projects in Nigeria: a review. TWIST19 (3), 130–138.
4
AlmeileA. M.ChipuluM.OjiakoU.VahidiR.MarshallA. (2024). Project-focussed literature on public-private partnership (PPP) in developing countries: a critical review. Prod. Plan. and Control35 (7), 683–710. 10.1080/09537287.2022.2123408
5
ChaoT.FarrierD. (2022). Risk transfer and value for money in public-private partnerships. Int. J. Proj. Manag.40 (8), 891–902.
6
ChilesheN.KavisheN.EdwardsD. J. (2023). Identification of critical capacity building challenges in public-private partnerships (PPPs) projects: the case of Tanzania. Int. J. Constr. Manag.23 (3), 495–504. 10.1080/15623599.2021.1892947
7
ChiswaN. (2024). Unlocking Africa’s economic potential: the role of PPPs in fuelling infrastructure development and investment–South Africa’s perspective. Jindal Glob. Law Rev.15 (1), 157–185. 10.1007/s41020-024-00221-7
8
CoxN. R.OsterhoffW. E. (2023). “The public-private partnership: a challenge and an opportunity for corrections,” in Privatizing correctional institutions (New York, NY: Vanderbilt), 113–129.
9
DasM. (2022). Allocation of climate funds and the adaptation infrastructure gap. Sustain. Dev. Res.4 (1), p42. 10.30560/sdr.v4n1p42
10
DelmasC. (2025). How to diagnose Prisons' Failures: three Perspectives on Officers' responsibilities. J. Appl. Philosophy, japp.70005. 10.1111/japp.70005
11
DemiragI. (2018). Corporate social responsibility, accountability and governance: global perspectives (London & New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group).
12
Department of Correctional Services (DCS) (2017). Annual report 2016/2017. Republic of South Africa: Pretoria: Department of Correctional Services.
13
Department of Correctional Services (DCS) (2021). Annual report 2021/2022. Republic of South Africa: Pretoria: Department of Correctional Services.
14
Department of Correctional Services (DCS) (2022). Annual report 2021/2022. Republic of South Africa: Pretoria: Department of Correctional Services.
15
Department of Correctional Services (2023). Annual report 2022/2023. Pretoria: Government of South Africa.
16
EelisP. (2020). Public-private partnership as a solution for competition restrictions for local governments in Finland. Eur. Procure. and Public-Private Partnersh. Law Rev.15 (4), 292–300. 10.21552/epppl/2020/4/7
17
FerkP.FerkB. (2021). Slovenia ∙ implementing electromobility in Slovenia under PPP approach-a case study european procurement and amp: public private partnerships. a case study european procurement and amp: public private partnership law Review, 16 (3), pp.255–259.
18
FombadM. (2014). Enhancing accountability in public–private partnerships. South. Afr. Bus.10.25159/1998-8125/5686
19
FombadC. M. (2017). Designing institutions and mechanisms for the implementation and enforcement of the constitution: changing perspectives in Africa. Afr. J. Int. Comp. Law25 (1), 66–90. 10.3366/ajicl.2017.0182
20
FouadM.RialI.AydinO. (2021). Mastering the risky business of public-private partnerships in infrastructure, 2021, 1. 10.5089/9781513576565.087
21
GalvinP.TywoniakS.SutherlandJ. (2021). Collaboration and opportunism in megaproject alliance contracts: the interplay between governance, trust and culture. Int. J. Proj. Manag.39 (4), 394–405. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.02.007
22
GleesonT. P.GrimseyD.LewisM. K. (2019). “How successful has the PPP model been in Australia?,” in Competitive.
23
GumedeV. (2018). Towards effective developmental states in Southern Africa. South Africa: University of South Africa.
24
HopkinsD. (2013). Exploding the myths of school reform. Sch. Leadersh. and Manag.33 (4), 304–321. 10.1080/13632434.2013.793493
25
HoranD. (2022). A framework to harness effective partnerships for the sustainable development goals. Sustain. Sci.17 (4), 1573–1587. 10.1007/s11625-021-01070-2
26
KeersB. B. M.van FenemaP. C. (2018). Managing risks in public-private partnership formation projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag.36 (6), 861–875. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.05.001
27
KhatleliN. (2015). Invocation of a step-in clause in prison PPPs: sustainability or management vagary?Proc. Int. Struct. Eng. Constr.2 (1). 10.14455/isec.res.2015.19
28
KhatleliN. (2016). The impediments to efficient megaproject implementation in South Africa. Proc. 32nd Annu. ARCOM Conf.2, 803–812.
29
KhatleliN. (2020a). Assessing the effectiveness of transaction advisors in mitigating information asymmetry in South African PPPs.
30
KhatleliN. (2020b). Investigating the resilience of public private partnership hospital infrastructure against the COVID-19 pandemic.
31
KwofieT. E.AigbavboaC.ThwalaW. D. (2019). Communication performance challenges in PPP projects: cases of Ghana and South Africa. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag.9 (5), 628–641. 10.1108/bepam-11-2018-0137
32
LeiglandJ. (2020). Public-private partnerships in developing countries: the emerging evidence-based critique. World Bank Res. Observer35 (1), 65–98.
33
MabuzaP. (2017). “A PPP model for developing a sustainable SME sector in developing countries,” in Advances in Public-Private Partnerships: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Public-Private Partnerships, Austin, Texas. Reston, VA, May 26–29, 2015 (American Society of Civil Engineers), 516–553.
34
MazherK. M.ChanA. P.ChoudhryR. M.ZahoorH.EdwardsD. J.GhaithanA. M.et al (2022). Identifying measures of effective risk management for public–private partnership infrastructure projects in developing countries. Sustainability14 (21), 14149. 10.3390/su142114149
35
MohlalaP. M. (2017). A conceptual framework for the establishment and operation of project management offices in South African municipalities. Pretoria: University of South Africa. Doctor of Business Leadership thesis.
36
MukukaM.AigbavboaC.ThwalaW. (2015). “Understanding construction projects’ schedule overruns in South Africa,” in Iccrem 2015, 591–602.
37
NallathigaR.VG.RN.KaarthikeyanG.SM. (2022). Lipid and renal profile in assessing the severity of alcoholic liver disease. Bioinformation18, 1036–1040. 10.6026/973206300181036
38
NasriH.NurmanN.AzwirmanA.ZainalZ.RiauanI. (2022). Implementation of collaboration planning and budget performance information for special allocation fund in budget planning in the regional development planning agency of rokan hilir regency. Int. J. Health Sci. (IJHS) Ecuador6 (S4), 639–651. 10.53730/ijhs.v6ns4.5597
39
National Treasury (2008). Standardised provisions for public-private partnership agreements. Pretoria: National Treasury.
40
National Treasury (2021). Public-private partnerships: overview and guidelines. Republic of South Africa: Pretoria: National Treasury.
41
NdlovuD. (2023). The role of public-private-partnerships (PPPs) in the creation of a sustainable circular economy within the city of ekurhuleni. New York, NY: Routledge.
42
NdouV. (2021). Social entrepreneurship education: a combination of knowledge exploitation and exploration processes. Adm. Sci.11 (4), 112. 10.3390/admsci11040112
43
NelD. (2020). Allocation of risk in public private partnerships in information and communications technology. Int. J. Ebus. eGovernment Stud.12 (1), 17–32. 10.34111/ijebeg.202012102
44
NtsobiM. (2024). An analysis of costs of private prisons against public prisons in South Africa. New Trends Qual. Res.20 (4), e988. 10.36367/ntqr.20.4.2024.e988
45
NuhuM.MpambijeC. J.NgussaB. M. (2020). Challenges affecting public–private partnership performance in infrastructure projects in developing countries. Int. J. Constr. Manag.20 (6), 540–552.
46
NuwagabaI.MolokwaneT.NduhuraA.LukambaM.MuhweziR.TshombeT. (2022). Do stakeholders matter? Nexus of public private partnership projects for city Street parking in Uganda. J. Supply Chain Manag.II, 35–44.
47
OwolabiH. A.OyedeleL.AlakaH.EbohonO. J.AjayiS.AkinadeO.et al (2019). Public private partnerships (PPP) in the developing world: mitigating financiers’ risks. World J. Sci. Technol. Sustain. Dev.16 (3), 121–141. 10.1108/wjstsd-05-2018-0043
48
QordjaD. (2021). Development framework for performance-based output specifications to encourage innovation in public-private partnerships. Toronto, ON: Toronto Metropolitan University. Doctoral dissertation.
49
SeeletseS. M. (2016). Performance of South African private-public partnerships. Problems Perspect. Manag.14 (2), 19–26. 10.21511/ppm.14(2).2016.02
50
SeemaN.KibuukaP. (2017). Innovative financing mechanisms for government to leverage private sector investment in infrastructure for sustainable development in South Africa: case study in the water sector. Public Munic. Finance6 (3), 33–44. 10.21511/pmf.06(3).2017.04
51
SewsankarG. (2024). The extent to which conflict of interest in the public sector affects private sector functioning. India: Unicaf University, 992–1000.
52
SinghB.NayyarA. (2024). Navigating deep learning models and health monitoring infrastructure financing in smart cities: review from legal perceptions and future innovations. Deep Learn. Eng. Energy Finance, 80–114.
53
TallakiM.BracciE. (2021). Risk allocation, transfer and management in public–private partnership and private finance initiatives: a systematic literature review. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag.34 (7), 709–731. 10.1108/ijpsm-06-2020-0161
54
WilliamsP.ClarkeC. P. (2022). “Private sector criminal risk assessment and risk management,” in The private sector and organized crime, 271–289.
55
WilsonC. (2022). Public engagement and AI: a values analysis of national strategies. Gov. Inf. Q.39 (1), 101652. 10.1016/j.giq.2021.101652
56
XuX.ChangX. (2017). Challenges in implementing public-private partnership projects: evidence from China. Int. J. Proj. Manag.35 (8), 1574–1585.
Summary
Keywords
effectiveness, infrastructure, public private partnership, department of correctional services, transparency
Citation
Maboko M and Khatleli N (2026) Assessing the effectiveness of public private partnerships (PPPs) in the South African correctional centers infrastructure provision. Front. Built Environ. 11:1564587. doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2025.1564587
Received
21 January 2025
Revised
30 July 2025
Accepted
27 August 2025
Published
19 March 2026
Volume
11 - 2025
Edited by
Corrado Lo Storto, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
Reviewed by
Paul Netscher, Independent Researcher, Perth, Australia
Fatemeh Pariafsai, Bowling Green State University, United States
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Maboko and Khatleli.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Mokgale Maboko, mabokomokgale@gmail.com
ORCID: Mokgale Maboko, orcid.org/0009-0004-1163-0398; Khatleli Nthatisi, orcid.org/0000-0002-7136-4931
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.