Qu Y, L M (2013) A meta-analysis of opportunistic behaviour in public-private partnerships: Manifestations and antecedents. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.
Abstract
Public-private partnerships (PPP) are increasingly popular around the world. A number of studies have been conducted on the risk factors and risk allocation in PPP, but they ignored the underlying forces which drive project stakeholders' behaviour when transferring risks. This paper addresses this gap by investigating the manifestation and antecedents of opportunistic behaviour in PPP projects. Using delinquency theory, transaction cost economics and agency theory, a conceptual model of antecedents of opportunistic behaviour in PPP is developed. A meta-analysis of 20 PPP case is conducted. It is found that self-interest seeking and asset specificity are the most important factors in motivating parties' to act opportunistically. Superordination and externalization are the two significant forces in justifying opportunistic behaviours in PPPs. In addition, risk occurrences have a direct relationship with opportunistic behaviour.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | public-private partnership; risk transfer; risk allocation; opportunistic behaviour |
| Index terms: | opportunistic behaviour, meta-analysis, transaction cost, risk allocation, asset specificity, project stakeholder, risk factor, partnership, agency |
| Subjects: | financial analysis, partnership management, business, economic concepts, financial risk, research evaluation and metrics, environmental hazards, sociology |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Cost Management, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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