Unsolicited Proposals
Menu

World Bank and PPIAF guidance on unsolicited proposals

Last checked: 20 October 2026 · Explainers

The World Bank and the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) published Policy Guidelines for Managing Unsolicited Proposals in Infrastructure Projects in July 2017, in three volumes 1,2. The guidance says unsolicited proposals should be managed with caution as an exception to public procurement 2. It names risks such as poor value for money, patronage and weak transparency 1. It recommends a single gatekeeper agency, early disclosure and competitive tendering, and it strongly discourages the right to match used in Swiss challenges 1.
Main guidance
Policy Guidelines for Managing Unsolicited Proposals in Infrastructure Projects, Volumes I to III, July 2017 2
Publishers
World Bank and PPIAF, Washington, DC 2
Countries reviewed
More than 15 1
Earlier study
PPIAF Working Paper No. 1, 2007, by John T. Hodges and Georgina Dellacha 4
Usual bonus range found in 2007
Between 5 and 10 per cent 3
Economies allowing unsolicited proposals
57 per cent of 135 assessed in 2018 5
Economies prohibiting them
3 per cent of 135 assessed in 2018 5

The guidance documents

The World Bank PPP Resource Center lists the 2017 guidelines as published on 1 July 2017 by the World Bank and PPIAF. Volume I is a summary of main findings and recommendations. Volume II sets out key policy decisions. Volume III is a review of practice around the world 2.

An earlier PPIAF paper, Working Paper No. 1 of 2007 by John T. Hodges and Georgina Dellacha, describes unsolicited proposals as projects not requested by a government that usually come from the private sector 4. It compares how several countries add competition to them 3.

The World Bank report Procuring Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships 2018 assessed 135 economies. It found that 57 per cent explicitly allow unsolicited proposals, 3 per cent explicitly prohibit them and 10 per cent do not regulate them 5.

Risks the guidance names

Volume I reports that two Philippine case studies took more than 15 years to become operational. It says Ghana's Accra-Kumasi Highway proposal faced delays of more than 11 years 1.

  • Diversion of public resources away from government strategic plans 1
  • Poor value for money 1
  • Patronage and a lack of transparency, mainly in developing countries 1
  • Strain on fiscal planning when proposals sit outside normal budgeting 1
  • A public view that unsolicited proposals are linked to corruption, whether or not claims are confirmed 1

Review phases

Volume I follows four phases of the process. Implementation is outside its scope 1.

PhaseWhat happens
Submission 1The private entity submits the proposal 1
Evaluation 1The agency decides whether to study the proposal further 1
Development 1The agency or the proponent prepares detailed studies 1
Procurement 1The project is tendered competitively or negotiated directly 1

Recommendations on process

The 2007 paper makes similar points. It says unsolicited proposal systems are not a substitute for overall infrastructure governance and planning. It calls for competition by default, firm timelines and a single approving authority 3.

  • Gatekeeper: one agency should receive submissions. Before formal evaluation it should check that the submission qualifies, meets requirements and passes integrity due diligence 1
  • Fees: a review fee can deter poor or opportunistic proposals and offset costs. Virginia charges US$50,000 1
  • Cost reimbursement: half of the frameworks studied allowed it. It is usually paid only if the project is accepted and tendered 1
  • Disclosure: agencies should disclose the main parts of the submission, the evaluation and the planned procurement, and publish all project documents once the project is approved for procurement 1
  • Bid periods: windows under about six months limit competition. Private firms told the review they need three to six months 1

Competition methods compared

The 2017 guidance recommends keeping any bonus small. It says the right to match significantly limits competition and strongly discourages it 1.

The 2007 paper reports that Chile's first two airport concessions carried a 20 per cent bonus, cut to 10 per cent in December 1996. In Korea, third parties won 6 of 65 tendered projects. In the Philippines and Guam the proponent had 30 working days to match 3.

MethodHow it worksExamples given
Bonus system 3The proponent's bid gets a bonus for evaluation, usually 5 to 10 per cent 3Chile, Korea, Indonesia 3
Swiss challenge 3Third parties bid in a set period and the proponent may match a better offer 3Philippines, India, Italy, Taiwan, Guam 3
Best and final offer 3Several tender rounds, with the proponent placed in the final round 3South Africa, Argentina 3
Automatic short listing 1The proponent is placed automatically in pre-qualification or a later stage but must still show it can deliver 1Not named 1

Common questions

Does the World Bank support the Swiss challenge?

The 2017 guidance strongly discourages the right to match, saying it significantly limits competition 1.

Should governments charge a fee for unsolicited proposals?

The 2017 guidance says a review fee can deter poor or opportunistic proposals and offset processing costs 1.

How many countries allow unsolicited proposals?

The World Bank found that 57 per cent of 135 economies assessed for its 2018 report explicitly allow them 5.

Where can I read the World Bank guidelines?

All three volumes are listed on the World Bank PPP Resource Center 2.

Rules and fees change. Check the official site linked above before you apply or pay. Spotted an error? Email [email protected] with the official link.

Sources

  1. World Bank and PPIAF: Policy Guidelines for Managing Unsolicited Proposals in Infrastructure Projects, Volume I, Main Findings and Recommendations (July 2017)
  2. World Bank PPP Resource Center: Policy Guidelines for Managing Unsolicited Proposals in Infrastructure Projects, Volumes I, II and III (1 July 2017)
  3. PPIAF: John T. Hodges and Georgina Dellacha, Unsolicited Infrastructure Proposals, How Some Countries Introduce Competition and Transparency, Working Paper No. 1 (2007)
  4. World Bank PPP Resource Center: catalogue entry for PPIAF Working Paper No. 1 (2007)
  5. World Bank: Procuring Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships Report 2018

Related