Lv, J; Lin, M; Zhou, W and Xu, M (2021) How PPP renegotiation behaviors evolve with traffic changes: Evolutionary game approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(5): 04021032, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
High risk in actual traffic demand often causes a serious imbalance in interests between the public and private sectors in transportation public-private partnership (PPP) projects. The party who suffers has the incentive to breach the contract and hopes to make up for their loss by renegotiating the PPP concessions. The high frequency of such concession renegotiations has raised questions about the viability of the PPP approach. To study how concession renegotiation behaviors evolve when actual traffic volume is lower or higher than expected, this study introduces traffic changes as a quantitative financial indicator. Moreover, it develops two evolutionary game models in which the private and public sectors initiate the renegotiation. The thresholds for renegotiation by the private and public sectors can be defined based on the models and provide decision support for the governance of concession renegotiation behaviors in transportation PPP projects to reduce the incidence and incentives to renegotiate PPP contracts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | evolutionary game; public-private partnership; renegotiation; traffic changes |
| Index terms: | decision support, private sector, partnership, public sector, governance, evolutionary game |
| Subjects: | business, administrative law, industry analysis, economic theory, partnership management, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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