Wu, M; Wing Chau, K; Shen, Q and Yin Shen, L (2012) Net asset value-based concession duration model for BOT contracts. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(2), pp. 304-308. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
A concession period is a key decision variable in the arrangement of a build-operate-transfer (BOT)-type contract. Recently, an innovative BOT concession model (BOTCcM) was developed to quantitatively determine the value of a concession period. The model could propose an interval for possible negotiations between a host government and a private investor. Nevertheless, this paper identifies a major limitation of this model and proposes an alternative model for improvement. Under a BOT arrangement, the project becomes a property of the host government upon its transfer. The project's net asset value at the transfer time is usually significantly greater than zero, representing revenue to the host government. This revenue, thus, cannot be ignored. However, this revenue was not considered in the analysis of BOTCcM. This study improves the second critical point in BOTCcM by considering project net asset value at the transfer time. The application of the new model is demonstrated by using the same example case quoted in BOTCcM and shows that a significantly different decision will be made when project net asset value at its transfer time is considered.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build/operate/transfer; concession period; negotiations; net asset value; project management |
| Index terms: | build-operate-transfer, duration, concession period, project management, investor, net asset, revenue, negotiation |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, contractual arrangements, sociology, project management theory and practice, contract structure, project controls, conflict resolution |
| Topics: | Procurement, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, 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