Ranasinghe, K A M K (1990) Analytical method for quantification of economic risks during feasibility analysis for large engineering projects. PhD thesis, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
The objectives of this thesis are to develop an analytical method for economic risk quantification during feasibility analysis for large engineering projects and to computerize the method to explore its behavior, to validate it and to test its practicality for the measurement of uncertainty of decision variables such as project duration, cost, revenue, net present value and internal rate of return. The method is developed by applying a risk measurement framework to the project economic structure. The risk measurement framework is developed for any function Y = g(X), between a derived variable and its correlated primary variables. Using moment analysis and the Pearson family of distributions, the uncertainty of the derived variable is quantified as a cumulative distribution function. The moments for the primary variables are evaluated from subjective estimates elicited from experts. The correlations between the primary variables are elicited as positive definite correlation matrices. The project economic structure describes an engineering project in three hierarchical levels, namely, work package/revenue stream, project performance and project decision. Each of these levels can be described by Y = g(X), with the derived variables of the lower levels as the primary variables for the upper level. Project duration is estimated by combining the generalized PNET algorithm to the project economic structure. This permits the evaluation of the multiple paths in the project network. Also, the limiting values of the PNET transitional correlation (0,1) permits the estimation of bounds on all of the derived variables. Project cost and revenue are evaluated in terms of current, total and discounted dollars, thereby emphasizing the economic effects of time, inflation and interest on net present value and internal rate of return. The internal rate of return is evaluated from a variation of Hillier's method. The analytical method is validated using Monte Carlo simulation. The validations show that the analytical method is a comprehensive and extremely economical alternative to Monte Carlo simulation for economic risk quantification of large engineering projects.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Russell, A D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | duration; measurement; uncertainty; inflation; project cost; correlation matrices; net present value; project performance; quantification; Monte Carlo simulation; simulation; validation |
| Index terms: | estimation, quantification, validation, Monte Carlo simulation, project performance, correlation matrice, revenue, project cost, distribution function, project network, inflation, net present value, estimate, variation, stream, duration, package |
| Subjects: | project controls, contractual condition, economics, measurement and scaling, project management theory and practice, project planning, data science, water management, financial and cost management, professional development, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, probability and distributions, modelling and simulation |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Sustainability, Information Management, Project Management, Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Time Control, Procurement, Cost Management |
| 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