Zhang, X (2004) Concessionaire selection: Methods and criteria. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(2), pp. 235-244. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Various innovative public private partnerships (PPPs) have been explored in worldwide infrastructure development in which BOT (build-operate-transfer) is the underlying concept. Selection of the right concessionaire, which is critical to the success of such BOT-type PPPs, depends on the quality of identifying and defining suitable project-specific criteria and the quality of formulating an efficient tender evaluation methodology. A systematic research approach (including literature review, case studies, interview/ correspondence, and a structured questionnaire survey) has been adopted to draw experience and learn lessons from international PPP practices and to unearth and refine experiential and expert knowledge from worldwide experts and practitioners. Tender evaluation criteria and methods currently used in diverse types of PPP projects in both developed and developing countries are identified, compared, analyzed, and then generalized.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build/operate/transfer; financing; infrastructure; partnership; private sector |
| Index terms: | case study, private sector, partnership, build-operate-transfer, public private partnership, developing country, interview, concessionaire, literature review, infrastructure development, survey, methodology, practitioner, tender evaluation, questionnaire, financing |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, data collection methods, contract type, practitioner, partnership management, industry analysis, research methods, tendering, development economics, infrastructure engineering |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, International Construction |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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