Afieroho, P (2024) Project management by the people, for the people, and of the people: Context, challenges, and prospects for adoption of e-government tools to monitor execution of public infrastructure projects in Nigeria. PhD thesis, University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA.
Abstract
An abundance of failed or abandoned public infrastructure projects contributes to Nigeria’s poor quality of life and economic development. The project management process for public infrastructure projects in Nigeria is opaque to the public and has not benefited from active public stakeholder involvement. This study investigated from a public perspective, (i) factors driving the public to participate effectively, (ii) moderating effect of using e-government tools on the public’s willingness to participate effectively, (iii) factors influencing the willingness of the public to adopt e-government tools and approaches to effectively participate, and (iv) current level of public participation in monitoring the execution of public infrastructure projects in Nigeria. Using questionnaire surveys and statistical analysis, the study found that the following conditions were required for active public participation to occur: (i) the public has access to and control of information on projects, (ii) the public has the power to control the agenda and influence decision making, (iii) structures are available for the public to engage with the project team and government on issues concerning public infrastructure projects, and (iv) adoption of e-government tools to public participation, as a moderating factor. It also found that, despite the low level of public infrastructure in Nigeria, the Nigerian public is ready and open to adopting e-government tools and platforms to participate in monitoring the execution of public infrastructure projects in Nigeria. This study presents new models for the participation of the public as a stakeholder group in project management. It recommends devolution of power to the public, creation of structures for public participation, enhancement of public access to information on projects, and deployment of e-government tools and approaches, such as having an interactive project website for the public to engage with the project team and government officials. This is anticipated to incentivize the Nigerian public as a stakeholder group to be more actively involved in public infrastructure project development.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Xiyu, Z T and Perkins, R |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Nigeria; decision making; economic development; government; infrastructure project; monitoring; participation; project team; public infrastructure; public participation; stakeholder; statistical analysis |
| Index terms: | decision-making, questionnaire, public participation, stakeholder involvement, economic development, quality of life, survey, project management process, monitoring, project development, infrastructure project, access to information, project team, project management, public infrastructure, platform, low level, statistical analysis, Nigeria |
| Subjects: | economic development, social equity, digital design, Geography, decision analysis, measurement and scaling, infrastructure and transport systems, public and environmental health, project management theory and practice, project delivery, participation process, data science, data collection methods, control systems |
| Topics: | Site Management, Digital Applications, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Ethics, Sustainability, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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