Cheung, E; Chan, A P C and Kajewski, S (2009) Enhancing value for money in public private partnership projects: Findings from a survey conducted in Hong Kong and Australia compared to findings from previous research in the UK. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 14(1), pp. 7-20. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to study the measures that enhance value for money (VFM) in public private partnership (PPP) projects from the findings achieved in a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire survey was conducted in Hong Kong (also known as the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) and Australia, and is compared to the results conducted by other researchers in the UK. Design/methodology/approach Respondents to the questionnaire were asked to rate 18 VFM measures in PPP projects. Findings The results found that the top five VFM measures ranked by the respondents from Hong Kong included: efficient risk allocation (allocating the risk to the party best able to manage it); outputbased specification; competitive tender; private management skill; and private sector technical innovation. The first and second of these VFM measures were also found to be ranked high by the respondents from Australia and the UK, indicating that these were true for these jurisdictions. Practical implications When the risks are handled well, less pitfalls are experienced and as a result VFM is more achievable. Hence, an efficient risk allocation is vital in determining whether VFM can be achieved in PPP projects. A clear outputbased specification can enable a more obvious project design and concept hence minimizing the possibility of delivering the wrong product for the user. Therefore, this measure is also important in determining whether VFM has been achieved for a PPP venture. Despite the interest in PPP, there is need for more systematic and indepth research to examine the measures that enhance VFM in PPP projects in Hong Kong. Originality/value In addition, this project also forms a comparative study for the use of PPP in Hong Kong, Australia and the UK.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; Hong Kong; partnership; private sector organizations; public sector organizations; United Kingdom |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, methodology, value-for-money, private sector organization, specification, public sector organization, survey, jurisdiction, United Kingdom, risk allocation, comparative study, public private partnership, project design, Hong Kong, Australia, partnership, private sector |
| Subjects: | legal systems, contractual arrangements, organization, research design and methodology, data collection methods, partnership management, administrative law, industry analysis, research methods, financial risk, evaluation, Geography, contractual condition |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Value Management, Contract Administration, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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