Affordable social infrastructure vs public-private partnership

The article is devoted to the problems of sustainable development of social infrastructure and social services, which are beyond the effective demand of large cities, cannot develop according to market laws, and provide the necessary level of infrastructure fullness. Despite 45.9% of private companies in the social sectors, the vast majority of real estate objects continue to be owned by the state, forming the need to find economic mechanisms for the development of state social infrastructure, outside of limited budget opportunities. The possibility of attracting private investment in new construction and reconstruction without alienating the ownership right to it makes public-private partnership (PPP) and the economic mechanism based on it have no alternative. However, its practical application suffers from asociality, leading to the appearance of state-owned facilities where private investors conduct exclusively commercial activities. The apparent budget savings lead the state, judicial and supervisory authorities in such territories to a strategic failure, reducing the number of state facilities operating at state prices, ignoring the requests of the population for affordable social infrastructure, increasing social tension in society. This work is aimed at studying the irrational behavior of private investors, the stability of which is provided by the PPP mechanism, where the state determines the necessary level of the sociality of infrastructure objects that best corresponds to the existing stratification of residents of a certain territory through competitive procedures and essential conditions of the future project. It is necessary to continue research on improving federal legislation, whose social neutrality leads to conflicting expectations of the parties from PPP, adding sensitivity to a wide range of risks, repelling private investment and investors, limiting infrastructure development only to budget opportunities. The development of an economic mechanism that ensures finding a balance of accessibility and market rationality of social facilities is not an easy task, which has many solutions taking into account the characteristics of a particular territory and its population