Algarni, A M; Arditi, D and Polat, G (2007) Build-operate-transfer in infrastructure projects in the United States. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(10), pp. 728-735. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
While the infrastructure in the United States is in need of large and immediate investment, the funds provided by public agencies are not nearly sufficient to face such a challenge. Build-operate-transfer (BOT) is a delivery/financing system that can be a solution to this problem. In this system, a private sponsor finances the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of a public project for a specified concession period, at the end of which it transfers ownership to the government agency, hopefully after recouping its costs and achieving profits. A questionnaire survey of large municipalities and state departments of transportation was conducted to determine the extent to which they are using BOT in their large projects, to investigate the implementation of BOT, and the reasons why some government agencies avoid using BOT. The findings indicate that very few agencies use BOT. The reasons why most do not use BOT were reported by the respondents to be the availability of proven alternatives and enough funds, the existence of political barriers, and resistance to change both on the part of government agencies and private sponsors. When government agencies and private sponsors explore the use of BOT, they should avoid the pitfalls perceived by the respondents in this study.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build/operate/transfer; delivery; financial management; infrastructure; project management; United States |
| Index terms: | ownership, build-operate-transfer, infrastructure project, implementation, project management, financial management, concession period, public project, questionnaire, agency, municipality, financing, United States, government agency, face, profit, survey |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, psychology, project management theory and practice, infrastructure engineering, Geography, economics, contract structure, infrastructure and transport systems, administrative law, sociology |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Legal Issues |
| 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