Lin, M-C (2000) Contract design of private infrastructure concessions. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Abstract
The main purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the impacts of concession contract design on the performance of private infrastructure concessions. It demonstrates that the design of a concession contract can mitigate various potential problems arising from the contractual relationship for private infrastructure concessions in general, and private highway concessions in particular. The dissertation emphasizes a special subset of private infrastructure concessions, the build-operate-transfer (“BOT”) projects. The concession contract is central to BOT planning because it can be tailored to promote different privatization goals and ease project execution in different context environments. The dissertation begins with an empirical survey of a wide range of procurement procedures and contract provisions used in designing infrastructure concessions. These procedures and provisions are tools available to the government for controlling the private concessionaire's behavior and aligning it with its own objectives. The dissertation shows that the diversity and complexity of these contracts can be understood in terms of three fundamental problems: asymmetrical information, incredible commitment, and contract incompleteness. Concession contracts are designed to address these problems as they appear in differing degrees in each contract environment. Next, the decision-making process of BOT projects is rigorously modeled as a game played between the government and concessionaire. The purpose of this modeling is to investigate how key project decisions are made, how they interact with important characteristics of the project, and what their impact is on project performance. This modeling is proven to be highly flexible and yields insights as to the key instruments of contract design. It is applied to study both traditional and innovative private highway contractual schemes. This modeling enables us to compare the performance of different schemes on a consistent basis. The contract analysis approach employed in the dissertation takes into account both incentive and risk factors of a BOT project and provides a comprehensive perspective conducive to innovative win-win solutions for designing concession contracts. Therefore, this research not only helps government agencies realize their policy objectives, but also assists private project developers to succeed in winning infrastructure projects.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Ashley, D B and Gillen, D W |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; highway; build-operate-transfer; government; policy; privatization; project performance; concession; infrastructure project; developer |
| Index terms: | government agency, concessionaire, commitment, survey, contractual relationship, concession contract, complexity, decision-making process, project performance, risk factor, build-operate-transfer, infrastructure project, dissertation, privatization, modelling |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, decision analysis, environmental hazards, systems engineering, administrative law, infrastructure and transport systems, contract type, contractual relationship, research dissemination and communication, data collection methods, psychology, analytical methods, economic analysis, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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