Li, B; Akintoye, A and Hardcastle, C (2001) Risk analysis and allocation in public private partnership projects. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, Salford, UK.
Abstract
The application of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) has become increasingly important in the development and delivery of public projects. Reviews of some completed PPP schemes in the UK and overseas indicate that not all PPP projects can claim to be successful, as a large number of uncertainties still affect this procurement approach. Conducting a comprehensive risk analysis, followed by appropriate positive action, are some of the critical factors contributing to the success of PPP projects. This research is thus aimed at developing a framework to evaluate and manage risk factors critical to PPPs, as they affect construction projects. Literature on risk assessment and management and PPP procurement has been, and is still being, reviewed. The risk associated with private provision of public infrastructure differs according to the nature of the service for which the facility is provided, and is also dependent on perspective. To enhance better understanding of project risks by all PPP participants, a three-tier structure of risks is proposed for the analysis of risk factors in PPP projects. This structure is made up of micro, macro and meso (level) risks. The micro level risks explore the uncertainty factors within a PPP organization. The macro level risks refer to the ecology variables, while the meso risk factors fall between the macro and micro levels, and are especially relevant to the entire project.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | public private partnership; risk; risk analysis; risk allocation |
| Index terms: | construction project, public project, risk assessment, risk allocation, risk factor, risk analysis, public private partnership, positive action, public infrastructure, ecology, critical factor |
| Subjects: | environmental science, contractual arrangements, psychology, risk assessment, environmental hazards, infrastructure and transport systems, infrastructure engineering, financial risk, production management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Risk Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management |
| 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