Zhang, X and Tariq, S (2020) Failure mechanisms in international water PPP projects: A public sector perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(6): 04020055, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Public-private partnerships (PPPs) have been embraced by governments worldwide for better project governance and improved value for money by sharing risks and rewards with the private sector and exploiting private capital, technologies, and management skills. Although there are a large number of studies that explore the success determinants of PPP projects with numerous publications, research on the root causes of the failure of PPP projects is scarce. Such research is all the more important in view of the many failed PPP projects that suffered from disastrous consequences, including some that were abandoned by sponsors and some bailed out by the host governments, resulting in substantial controversy, criticism, and conflict. Through a systematic research approach that combines literature review, case studies, a questionnaire survey, and statistical analysis, this study (1) categorized six types of water PPP failure, (2) identified 33 failure drivers occurring in different stages of the PPP life cycle, (3) evaluated the relative significance of the 33 failure drivers, and (4) formulated an overall failure map that integrates 24 failure mechanisms, each resulting in a certain type of failure. Outputs of this study would facilitate stakeholders in monitoring the failure drivers in different PPP stages and developing reactive as well as preventive measures to effectively remove or mitigate their impacts toward the successful development of water PPP projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | failure driver; failure mechanism; path analysis; public-private partnership; water project |
| Index terms: | publication, value-for-money, questionnaire, literature review, survey, determinant, path analysis, monitoring, life cycle, partnership, private sector, statistical analysis, public sector, case study, governance |
| Subjects: | partnership management, statistical analysis, industry analysis, administrative law, evaluation, data analysis and analytics, data science, business, risk assessment, research dissemination and communication, data collection methods, value management, control systems |
| Topics: | Site Management, Legal Issues, Value Management, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Governance, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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