Iyer, K C and Sagheer, M (2010) Hierarchical structuring of PPP risks using interpretative structural modeling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(2), pp. 151-159. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Project risk management emphasizes the need to rank and prioritize risks in a project to focus the risk management efforts. This risk prioritization is of special significance in public-private partnership (PPP) projects, since project success depends upon the efficient allocation of risks to the party who can best manage it. Previous studies on risk identification and assessment of PPP project risks have only produced an unstructured list of such risks and prioritizing them on the basis of probability and impact. This paper suggests the use of interpretative structural modeling (ISM) to prepare a hierarchical structure as well as the interrelationships of these risks that would enable decision makers to take appropriate steps. MICMAC (matrice d'impacts croises-multiplication appliqú a un classemen) analysis is also done to determine the dependency and driving power of the risks. ISM, along with MICMAC analysis, provides a useful hierarchy of risks whose individual relationships are unambiguous but whose group relationships are too complex to organize intuitively and can help practitioners better understand risk dependencies and prioritize risk-mitigation efforts. This study identified 17 risks encountered during the development phase of PPP projects in Indian road sector and found that fourteen risks were weak drivers and weak dependents. Delay in financial closure, cost overrun risk, and time overrun risk have been found to have the highest dependence on other risks. The analysis can be extended by practitioners for risk analysis in other infrastructures such as railways, seaports, airports etc.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build/operate/transfer; infrastructure; risk management; structural models; toll roads |
| Index terms: | project risk management, cost overrun, partnership, time overrun, project success, prioritizing, risk management, structural modelling, risk identification, toll, risk prioritization, risk analysis, practitioner, mitigation |
| Subjects: | practitioner, risk assessment, analytical methods, financial and cost management, financial risk, project management theory and practice, environmental hazards, transportation engineering, partnership management, project controls, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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