Musenero, L; Baroudi, B and Gunawan, I (2023) Critical issues affecting dispute resolution practice in infrastructure public-private partnerships. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 149(3): 04023001, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Infrastructure public-private partnership (PPP) projects across the world have suffered early termination, premature change of ownership, cost and time overruns, among others, often resulting from a number of issues some of which are related to poorly managed dispute. Despite this, literature revealed that no process-centric attempt had been made to highlight the critical issues affecting dispute resolution (DR) in infrastructure PPPs. Through event sequence analysis (ESA) of 158 data sources (including 63 journal articles), this study examined the critical issues affecting infrastructure PPP DR practice, with the motivation of unveiling areas of potential improvement to the DR practice. Among other findings, the multiple roles of the public partner in the DR process were found to result in ambiguity on who was responsible for overseeing their actions. Relatedly, the effectiveness of dispute boards was on some occasions undermined when they were assigned multiple functions. Besides this study adding to the theoretical body of knowledge through application of ESA in infrastructure PPP DR research, it clarified the critical issues affecting current infrastructure PPP DR practice, thereby enhancing infrastructure PPP practitioners' understanding of potential barriers to successful infrastructure PPP DR. Although the researchers acknowledge the plausibility of an in-depth investigation into ways in which the critical issues in DR practice can be addressed, the main focus of this study was to provide clarity on the critical issues affecting DR in infrastructure PPPs. A separate study focusing on improvements to DR in infrastructure PPPs is recommended.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | critical issues; dispute resolution; infrastructure; public-private partnership |
| Index terms: | practitioner, time overrun, dispute, ownership, motivation, critical issue, journal, effectiveness, investigation, resolution, body of knowledge, partnership |
| Subjects: | economics, partnership management, data collection methods, project controls, knowledge management, risk assessment, conflict resolution, psychology, practitioner, research dissemination and communication, dispute resolution, performance management |
| Topics: | Time Control, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Quality Management, Information Management, Risk Management, Legal Issues |
| 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