Bhagat, G and Jha, K N (2023) Stage-wise evaluation of integrity risks in public works procurement in India. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(16), pp. 2818-2829. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Government agencies undertake procurement of works to achieve multiple goals. Like most countries, India has seen a rising volume of public construction projects. Nonetheless, this is an area that is yet to be tamed by the widespread procurement reforms, rendering it prone to corruption. This study introduces integrity risk management to construction management through a stage-wise assessment of integrity risks. Fifty-five major integrity risks are identified and mapped across the nine project stages. Delphi technique involving 11 domain experts yields reliable judgment on each risk item's probability and severity. Prioritization of risks as per the overall impact reveals 30 top risks concentrated in the 'contract management' stage, followed by the 'bid design' and 'payments'. A risk heat map is developed for a holistic visual depiction of these risks. Top risks include poor supervision, substitution of materials, mandatory tests not done, hindrances not properly recorded, tailor-made contracts, and non-transparent engagement of sub-contractors. The study demonstrates the application of the Bowtie analysis as a prospective risk management method in construction projects. The dynamic stage-wise integrity risk analysis presented should be of immediate functional utility to policymakers, practitioners, and academicians.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | public sector procurement; corruption; integrity; risks; India |
| Index terms: | judgment, risk management, Delphi technique, contract management, risk analysis, sub-contractor, construction project, supervision, integrity, corruption, government agency, public construction, practitioner, public work, India, public sector procurement |
| Subjects: | building construction, dispute resolution, production management, contractual arrangements, control systems, risk assessment, infrastructure engineering, practitioner, administrative law, Geography, professional ethics, health safety and environment, contract management, data collection methods, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Legal Issues, Project Management, Sustainability, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Procurement, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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