Arijeloye, B T (2025) Impact of project risk allocation on PPP housing project delivery in Nigeria: Partial least square structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 23(3), pp. 812-829. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to help understand how adopting risk allocation criteria impacts the delivery of public–private partnership (PPP) mass housing in Nigeria with the view of promoting the adoption of PPP housing scheme in Nigeria. Design/methodology/approach: The research design adopts the census sampling approach by using well-structured questionnaires distributed to stakeholders involved in PPP-procured mass housing projects, i.e. consultants, in-house professionals, contractors and the organized private sector, registered with PPP departments in the Federal Capital Territory Development Authority, Abuja, Nigeria. Sixty-three risk factors, nine risk allocation criteria and nine project delivery indices were submitted for the respondents to rank on a Likert scale of 7. Two hypotheses were formulated to test whether the risk allocation criteria impacted PPP mass housing delivery or otherwise. The study adopts partial least square-structural equation modeling to model the effect of risk on risk allocation criteria on project delivery indices and risk severity. Findings: The finding shows that project risk allocation criteria have less effect on project delivery indices than on risk severity. The study concludes that risk allocation principles do not directly affect the delivery of PPP-procured mass housing projects. This is evident by the path coefficient of 0.724 values, which is not statistically significant at a 5% alpha protection value. The study concludes that allocating critical risk factors influences the performance of PPP-procured mass housing projects, as the path coefficient of 0.360 is also not significantly far from 0 and at a 5% alpha protection value. Originality/value: The study is one of the recent studies conducted in PPP-procured mass housing projects in Nigeria owing to the novelty of procurement option in the sector. It highlights the risk factors that can jeopardize the PPP-procured mass housing project objectives. The study is of immense value to PPP actors in the sector by providing the necessary information required to formulate risk response methods to minimize the impact of the risk factors in PPP mass housing projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | mass housing projects; PPP risk allocation principles; PPP risks; public–private partnership; structural equation model |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, Likert scale, methodology, Abuja, housing, partial least square, risk response, housing project, structural equation modelling, housing delivery, sampling, risk factor, structural equation model, risk allocation, project delivery, option, mass housing project, Nigeria, private sector, partnership, research design |
| Subjects: | construction type, economic development, research methods, Geography, financial risk, housing and residential development, environmental hazards, data collection methods, research design and methodology, project delivery, partnership management, decision analysis, industry analysis, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Risk Management, Procurement, Sustainability, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Urban Studies |
| 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