Kangari, R (1982) Construction project selection under risk: Market model approach. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Abstract
This study develops a construction project selection model under conditions of risk, and provides guidance for its implementation. The model consists of three parts. Part I selects an appropriate objective for the model based on shareholder's expected equity maximization, and examines some alternative objectives. Part II describes risk and return as two major variables of the objective. Risk is classified as economic, industry, company, and project characteristics. This classification allows the model to estimate the construction projects' required rates of return. Part III develops a criterion for decision making. The model allows the contractors to do sensitivity analysis of markup and risk to aid in project selection with and without resource constraints.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision making; market |
| Index terms: | implementation, project selection, sensitivity analysis, maximization, decision-making, resource constraint, estimate, construction project |
| Subjects: | value management, financial and cost management, environmental hazards, contractual arrangements, algorithms, decision analysis, production management, operations management |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Project Management, Procurement, Cost Management |
| 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