Shen, L Y and Wu, Y Z (2005) Risk concession model for build/operate/transfer contract projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(2), pp. 211-220. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper extends the build-operate-transfer (BOT) concession model (BOTCcM) to establishing a risk concession model for BOT contract projects. The decision for a concession period is one of the most important decisions in determining a BOT contract. BOTCcM presents an alternative method to assist in determining a concession period that can protect the basic interests of both the investor and the government concerned. However, there is a major limitation in using the model, namely it gives no consideration to the impacts of risks on the estimation of various economic variables in the model. This study considers the risk impacts to the BOTCcM model and presents an additional risk concession model. This model provides an approach for formulating a concession period to consider the impacts of risks and, at the same time, protect the basic interests of both the investor and the government concerned. A hypothetical case is used to show the procedures of formulating the risk concession period through the assistance of the Monte Carlo simulation method.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build/operate/transfer; contracts; Monte Carlo method; project management; risk analysis; simulation |
| Index terms: | investor, project management, concession period, estimation, risk impact, Monte Carlo simulation, build-operate-transfer, risk analysis |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, sociology, environmental hazards, contract structure, contractual arrangements, modelling and simulation, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Project Management, Cost Management, Procurement |
| 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