Gupta, T; Kothari, C and Misra, S (2025) Integrating 'difficulty in management' as a decision-making criterion in the risk assessment of PPP infrastructure projects. Construction Management and Economics, 43(7), pp. 502-517. ISSN 0144-6193
Abstract
Risk assessment is pivotal in managing Public-Private Partnership (PPP) infrastructure projects, as risks can significantly influence project outcomes. In the literature, qualitative and quantitative methods have been utilized for risk assessment in PPP projects. However, qualitative approaches are preferred due to challenges in risk quantification and prevalent data constraints. The existing frameworks predominantly utilize the impact of occurrence (I) and probability/frequency of occurrence (F) for assessing risks. Although important, these existing qualitative frameworks often overlook the manageability aspect of risks, i.e., how easy or difficult it is to manage them. To address this gap, this article proposes an additional criterion, 'Difficulty in Management' (DIM). The proposed framework aims to integrate DIM into conventional risk assessment frameworks. The developed framework is implemented in a case study of Indian highway PPP projects to test the framework and demonstrate its benefits. The case study highlighted that adding DIM as an additional criterion is justified and can provide critical information to the decision-makers. Assessing risks through a manageability lens can guide policy, practice, and future research directions in the field.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | difficulty in management; infrastructure projects; public private partnership; qualitative assessment; risk management |
| Index terms: | decision-making, quantitative method, infrastructure project, public private partnership, risk assessment, risk management, partnership, qualitative approach, project outcome, quantification, case study |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, partnership management, measurement and scaling, decision analysis, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, risk assessment, financial risk, research methods, contractual arrangements, project completion |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Procurement, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Cost Management, Research Practice |
| 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