Meduri, S S and Annamalai, T R (2013) Unit costs of public and PPP road projects: Evidence from India. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(1), pp. 35-43. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
There has been an overall increase in the level of private-sector investment for the road sector in many developing countries during the past decade. However, there has been limited research on the effect of such increased private-sector participation on road costs. By using data from 521 public and private road projects in India, it was found that there are significant differences between public and private-sector projects. Public - private partnership (PPP) roads have a longer length, a higher project cost, and lower unit costs than public projects. Although regression analysis indicated that private-sector investment tended to increase unit costs, lower unit costs were achieved for PPP road projects because developers could take advantage of economies of scale. It was also found that the presence of foreign sponsors in the private consortium and prevalence of corruption increased unit costs. Results from a logistic regression analysis indicated that states that were more developed and had lower levels of corruption could be more successful in attracting private-sector investment for road projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | corruption; foreign investors; PPP; public sector; roads; unit costs |
| Index terms: | developing country, project cost, evidence, corruption, public project, unit cost, consortium, investor, public sector, partnership, presence, logistic regression analysis, road project, regression analysis, India |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, environmental science, evaluation and assessment methods, statistical analysis, administrative law, professional ethics, sociology, partnership management, development economics, infrastructure engineering, Geography, economics |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, International Construction, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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