Ho, S P (2006) Model for financial renegotiation in public-private partnership projects and its policy implications: Game theoretic view. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(7), pp. 678-688. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Today, government is no longer considered the sole provider of public works or services. Public-private partnership (PPP) has been recognized as an important approach to solving problems for governments in providing infrastructure systems. However, the joint ownership or partnership in PPP complicates the administration of PPP projects. Too often, in PPP, many serious problems occur mainly because of bad administration policies. In particular, the fact that government may rescue a distressed project and renegotiate with the developer causes major problems in project procurement and management. This paper aims to study when and how government will rescue a distressed project and what impacts government's rescue behavior has on project procurement and management. A game-theory based model for government rescue dynamics is developed. Propositions, corollaries, and important policy implications are then derived from the model. This pilot study, the writer hopes, may provide theoretic foundations to policy makers for prescribing effective PPP procurement and management policies and for examining the quality of PPP policies. The study can also offer researchers a framework and a methodology to understand the behavioral dynamics of the parties in PPP.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contract management; contracts; financial management; partnerships; procurement |
| Index terms: | dynamics, public work, ownership, foundations, policy implication, financial management, partnership, methodology, project procurement, contract management |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, economic analysis, policy studies, systems engineering, partnership management, infrastructure engineering, contract management, structural engineering, research methods, economics |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Contract Administration |
| 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