Esmaeeli, A N and Heravi, G (2019) Real options approach versus conventional approaches to valuing highway projects under uncertainty. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(11): 04019068, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Conventional valuation approaches - discounted cash flow - consider project alternatives as preset scenarios of predefined activities and ignore uncertainty and managerial flexibilities. The real options (RO) approach has been recently used by a large number of researchers to overcome the shortcomings of conventional approaches. This research contributes to the existing body of knowledge by presenting an innovative RO method which models flexible strategies in highway projects valuation under uncertainty through four advances over established studies. First, as well as traffic demand and time value of money, uncertainties about unit rates of agency and user costs are accounted for by a fuzzy approach. Second, flexible strategies are developed by considering the options embedded in the decision-making procedure for initial construction and rehabilitation of pavement. Third, a method is used to develop pavement performance curves based on traffic demand and corresponding effects of each construction activity. Fourth, user costs as well as agency costs are considered in analysis. Results of applying the model in a case study in Iran reveal that conventional valuation approaches may overestimate project life-cycle costs and that, in many cases, the flexibilities modeled by the developed fuzzy RO approach help managers enhance project value.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | fuzzy set theory; highway project; infrastructure investment; life-cycle costs; managerial flexibility; ranking of alternatives; real options; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | case study, fuzzy set theory, construction activity, strategy, manager, discounted cash flow, body of knowledge, agency, highway construction, decision-making, option, unit rate, real option, infrastructure investment |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, financial analysis, civil engineering, decision-making and optimization, decision analysis, data collection methods, sociology, practitioner, knowledge management, construction operations, management, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Site Management, Business Strategy, Information Management, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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