Birnie, J (1998) Risk allocation to the construction firm within a private finance initiative (PFI) project. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 14th Annual ARCOM Conference, 9-11 September 1998, Reading, UK.
Abstract
The introduction by the UK government of the private finance initiative (PFI) in 1992 was intended to lead to a radical increase in capital projects which had previously been funded by the public sector. The construction industry whilst initially interested because of the potential extra work have subsequently expressed reservations about the successful implementation. The additional risk bearing was seen as a major concern by the industry. This paper addresses these concerns and considers the most appropriate and fairest means to both parties of assessing risk, including the possible use of independent risk assessors.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | private finance initiative; risk assessment; risk allocation; residual value |
| Index terms: | construction industry, implementation, risk assessment, capital project, private finance initiative, risk allocation, public sector, construction firm |
| Subjects: | organization, strategic project management, contractual arrangements, financial risk, administrative law, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice, Procurement, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here