Liang, Y (2012) A study of public private partnership project success factors and risk management integration in mainland China. PhD thesis, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Abstract
To solve the conflict between limited fiscal funds and increasing demands to strengthen infrastructure construction, Public Private Partnership (PPP) was introduced by the Chinese government as an effective approach to make use of private investment to implement infrastructure projects. To provide services or facilities for public use, in PPP, participants pool their skills and resources while at the same time sharing the risks and rewards. The application of PPP could not only ease the government’s financial pressure, but also improve the efficiency of infrastructure construction and ensure the service quality of projects. Although PPP produces these benefits, the complexity and long-term features of PPP projects expose participants to more risks than in traditional projects. Therefore, risk management of participants is critical to the success of PPP projects. As an innovative procurement approach involves a variety of stakeholders over a long time span, it is necessary to investigate how to appraise and recognize PPP project success. In addition, although risk management has attracted much attention, few studies examine the detailed link between various dimensions of risk management and PPP project success. This research therefore intends to fill these two gaps. Compared with countries in the West, PPP was introduced into China relatively recently. A comparative study was employed in this research in order to understand the Chinese situation and to make use of the experience of other countries to critique PPP project performance in Mainland China. In this study, a two-pronged research program—comprising quantitative and qualitative approaches—was used to test and validate the tripartite theoretical model which was set up based on Transaction Cost Economics (TCE), Resource-based View (RBV) and Relational Exchange Theory (RET). In the quantitative study, questionnaire surveys were conducted concurrently in Mainland China and other places. Hierarchical Multiple Regression was used to explore the relationships posited in the research framework. To provide supportive and complementary evidence to the quantitative data, a case study of a PPP project in Mainland China was undertaken. Open-ended interviews and the thematic analysis technique were adopted in the case study. Taken together, the findings indicated that although the facets of risk management significantly affect project success, there are subtle different influences on different stakeholders’ benefits. For example, the uncertainty of social issues and economic issues will affect public partner’s benefits while the uncertainty of political & institutional issues, economic issues and project specific issues are directly influence private partner’s benefits. To maximize their own interests, different stakeholders should pay more attention to the influencing factors that are specifically associated with them. Meanwhile, it is demonstrated that individual efforts on risk management also contribute to the benefits of other stakeholders as well as to the whole industry development. In addition, the comparative study suggests that public partners of PPP projects in Mainland China could refer to the risk management experience of public partners from other countries to make an appropriate risk management commitment and better manage risks. On the other hand, private partners of PPP projects in Mainland China need to pay more attention to the macro-control of the government so as to protect their rights and interests.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | transaction cost; uncertainty; resource-based view; infrastructure construction; integration; risk management; service quality; China; thematic analysis; case study; infrastructure project; stakeholder; interview; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, China, qualitative approach, risk management, project performance, commitment, evidence, infrastructure construction, industry development, service quality, thematic analysis, efficiency, private investment, case study, project success, survey, critique, transaction cost, resource-based view, program, multiple-regression, integration, complexity, public private partnership, dimension, influencing factor, comparative study, interview, infrastructure project |
| Subjects: | performance management, civil engineering, economic analysis, project management theory and practice, organization, data collection methods, contractual arrangements, research design and methodology, financial analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, Geography, risk assessment, methods and analysis, evaluation and assessment methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics, performance measurement, research methods, systems engineering, management, software systems, organizational analysis, psychology, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Digital Applications, Project Management, Quality Management, Risk Management |
| 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