Incentive/disincentive provisions in highway contracts

Arditi, D; Khisty, C J and Yasamis, F (1997) Incentive/disincentive provisions in highway contracts. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 123(3), pp. 302-307. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The objective of the study reported in this paper is to compare contracts that include incentive/ disincentive (I/D) provisions against contracts that do not include I/D provisions, with regard to the consequences of these measures. The study involves both completed and ongoing highway and bridge renovation/rehabilitation projects undertaken by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). After a general overview of I/D implementation, the results of a study that covered 28 I/D contracts (contracts that included I/D provisions) and 29 non-I/D contracts undertaken by IDOT during the five-year period 1989-93 are presented. The major finding of this study is that the majority of the I/D contracts are completed on time or sooner, which supports the use of I/D provisions in these contracts. However, this saving in contract duration seems to be accompanied by increased project costs most of the time.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: rehabilitation project, project cost, duration, implementation, renovation
Subjects: health conditions and diseases, project controls, economics, renovation and retrofit, contractual arrangements
Topics: Health and Safety, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Time Control
Descriptive scope: 2 PC

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