McCowan, A K and Mohamed, S (2007) Decision support system to evaluate and compare concession options. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(2), pp. 114-123. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
With the increased popularity of concession projects over the last three decades, there is a need for a decision support system (DSS) capable of evaluating and comparing several concession project investment (CPI) options in an effective and efficient manner. Hence, a novel DSS has been developed that takes into consideration both financial and nonfinancial aspects of the investment option, as well as the uncertainties commonly encountered during the feasibility stage of a project. The DSS is fully implemented as a standalone computer software package, ECCO (evaluate and compare concession options), in order to be of practical use. This paper outlines and validates ECCO's design and structure through the demonstration of its capabilities in the evaluation and comparison of three real-life CPI case studies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; decision support systems; financial management; investments |
| Index terms: | software package, decision support, financial management, case study, option |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, data collection methods, decision analysis, software systems |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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