Privatization can be viewed as the public sector selling its crown jewels, or most valuable assets. Privatization can also be seen as the private sector profiteering from the delivery of "public" services and assets. On the other hand, privatization can be viewed as a partnership between the public and private sectors whereby the benefits from privatization can flow to the public sector and provide the financing for the development and improvement of other infrastructure. Partnerships and concessions can be viewed as tapping private-sector skills and expertise and transferring operational risk to the private-sector party.
Given these potential impacts of contract approach on public opinion, the way the preferred approach is determined and its potential benefits will need careful explanation. The Chicago Skyway project is an example of a successful approach that incorporated two points of view: some referred to it as a privatization, others a concession, but what it did achieve is a significant up-front payment to the City of Chicago with very little public resistance (see Case Study 6: Chicago Skyway Project).
One criticism of projects involving private finance is that they are typically those that are the easiest to develop, deliver, and, possibly, profit from; and that the most complex or controversial projects are thought to be typically left for public funding. Consequently, governments should articulate the fact that such partnerships enable them to efficiently meet a need that they could not otherwise fulfill.