Schaufelberger, J E and Wipadapisut, I (2003) Alternate financing strategies for build-operate-transfer projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), pp. 205-213. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper contains a study of build-operate-transfer (BOT) project financing strategies from the perspective of project sponsors. The financing strategy for a BOT project includes the selection of the appropriate mix of equity and debt financing, and the identification of appropriate financing sources. Project sponsors typically wish to minimize their financing costs to ensure their tenders are competitive. Thirteen transportation and power-generation BOT projects in North America and Asia were analyzed. Important considerations and financing strategies were identified and examined. The findings suggest that project risks, project conditions, and availability of financing are the major considerations in selecting a financing strategy. The project risks that were determined to be most significant in financing strategy selection were political, financial, and market risks. Based on the study findings, a decision model was developed that can be used by BOT project sponsors in selecting appropriate financing strategies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build/operate/tranfer; financial management; infrastructure; project management |
| Index terms: | build-operate-transfer, debt financing, project management, financial management, Asia, financing, project sponsor, strategy |
| Subjects: | management, project management theory and practice, financial risk, sociology, regions and continents, economic analysis, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Project Management, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Procurement, Stakeholder Management |
| 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