Shrestha, R B and Ogunlan, S (2006) Comparative study of power purchase agreements in the Nepalese environment. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 11(3), pp. 133-148. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
This paper describes the experiences and the contentious issues on eight existing PPAs in Nepal with varying type of investment, the key areas where IPPs are treated fairly and the areas where IPPs are discriminated against by the clauses are highlighted. Power Purchase Agreements on IPPs in Nepal are of three types: with foreign investment, local investment and investment in JV with the Utility. A critical issue in designing power purchase agreements is to create a level playing field for the players to secure successful and sustainable IPPs and PPAs. To create this environment, discriminatory clauses or unequal treatment to IPPs in the key issues of the PPAs should be avoided; the key issues being power purchase guarantees, force majeure guarantees, financial and foreign exchange guarantees, operation guarantees, and guarantees concerning insurance and dispute resolution. The analysis shows that discriminatory clauses and unequal treatment are present in the key issues of the agreements.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | guarantees; independent power producers; independent power production; power purchase agreements; take or pay contracts |
| Index terms: | dispute, force majeure, critical issue, agreements, resolution, take or pay contracts, Nepal, foreign investment, insurance, comparative study, independent power producer, guarantee, power purchase agreement |
| Subjects: | Geography, contract structure, payment, conflict resolution, mitigation, dispute resolution, research design and methodology, risk assessment, economic analysis, energy systems, contract formation |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, International Construction, Legal Issues, Procurement, Sustainability, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy |
| 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