Fischer, K; Leidel, K; Riemann, A and Alfen, H W (2010) An integrated risk management system (IRMS) for PPP projects. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 15(3), pp. 260-282. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Purpose – Large infrastructure projects involve many different stakeholders. Risk allocation is negotiated between the public sector and the special purpose vehicle (SPV)/consortium. Moreover, risk allocation is negotiated between the shareholders of the SPV and between the SPV and its contractors, financiers/lenders and insuring companies. Since the individual understanding of risks associated with the project differs amongst the contract partners, negotiation is often very time consuming and may not lead to the best possible outcome. The variability of risk management approaches and a lack of coherent practices often prove to be problematic. The purpose of this paper is to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach – The study has been conducted using a questionnaire and expert interviews to identify the current state of public-private partnership (PPP) risk management. As a result, a process model for risk management for each stakeholder has been developed. Findings – By developing an integrated risk management system (IRMS), it is possible to meet particular project requirements, such as reducing complexity, establishing risk awareness, covering the different perspectives of the parties involved, building on a common understanding regarding the nature of risks and opportunities providing step-by-step contingency instructions, and enhancing the available information. Originality/value – The provision of an IRMS in PPP will induce transparency by utilizing better sources of data and information distribution. Moreover, the application of sophisticated risk management techniques will enhance the capabilities and accuracy of the decision-making processes. As a result, credibility and a common understanding of key data, ratios and reports for all contract partners is achieved.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | partnership; private sector organizations; public sector organizations; risk management |
| Index terms: | consortium, special purpose vehicle, partnership, decision-making process, public sector, risk management, risk allocation, information distribution, transparency, variability, negotiation, interview, large infrastructure project, accuracy, public sector organization, methodology, questionnaire, private sector organization, complexity |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, data collection methods, organization, financial and cost management, research methods, financial risk, infrastructure engineering, professional development, conflict resolution, partnership management, decision analysis, administrative law, statistical analysis, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Legal Issues |
| 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