Regan, M; Smith, J and Love, P E D (2011) Impact of the capital market collapse on public-private partnership infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(1), pp. 6-16. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The collapse of capital markets is having an impact of the funding arrangements for economic and social infrastructure projects in Australia. Bearing this in mind, this paper seeks to examine whether the current volatility and uncertainty in capital markets in Australia affects the feasibility of privately financed infrastructure and specifically the public-private partnership (PPP) method of procurement. This paper examines the role and dependency that capital markets play in funding PPPs, current market conditions, and how they will affect PPP viability. In addition, alternative funding and procurement mechanisms that can be used for short-and medium-term infrastructure deliveries are presented.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; financial factors; infrastructure; partnerships; private sector; procurement |
| Index terms: | markets, infrastructure project, financial factor, funding, Australia, partnership, private sector, infrastructure delivery, market condition |
| Subjects: | partnership management, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, Geography, strategic project management, economic analysis, economic and policy analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management |
| 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