Xenidis, Y and Angelides, D (2005) The legal risks in build-operate-transfer projects. Journal of Construction Research, 6(2), pp. 273-292. ISSN 1609-9451
Abstract
The Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) project development scheme allows realization of public works through private financing. This context is full of risks due to the great number of stakeholders from different disciplines involved. The contribution of this paper is the provision of a comprehensive list of the legal risks, associated with the BOT projects in their lifecycle. The framework of legal risks is discussed, the justification for each risk is presented and the content of each individual risk is elaborated. Furthermore, a risk classification approach is presented, based on the time of occurrence and risk generation source. This list is a useful tool for practitioners because it substantially facilitates the risk analysis process in a BOT project and can be used as a shared platform of BOT legal issues.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | BOT projects; risk; legal |
| Index terms: | financing, lifecycle, legal issue, practitioner, project development, build-operate-transfer, public work, platform, risk analysis |
| Subjects: | practitioner, environmental hazards, economic analysis, digital design, infrastructure engineering, contractual arrangements, legal systems, project delivery |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Digital Applications, Procurement, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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