Teale, Allan F (2022) The relationship between transparency, public private partnerships and delivery outcomes in major transport infrastructure. PhD thesis, University of Technology Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
Transparency, inclusion, and stakeholder participation have become buzzwords that are regularly related to in the literature relating to contemporary planning in major public infrastructure procurement. However, the concept can be defined and administered differently by different governing authorities in different countries. The term will be defined differently depending on the government authorities or academic writers' unique and distinct fundamental philosophical positions. One of the heralded principles of government authorities reasoning in using public-private partnerships in infrastructure procurement is that it is claimed that the PPP model of delivery offers a more open, transparent, inclusive, and accountable delivery process than that of the traditional model. This study outlines the differences in the application of the internal governance structures of two different first-world neo-liberal governments and their chosen models of PPP in Infrastructure procurement in the province of British Columbia, Canada, and the state of Oregon in the USA. The study rigorously investigated the approach adopted to transparency, stakeholder inclusion, and participation in the procurement and delivery processes of major public road infrastructure projects and how transparency was addressed in infrastructure over three case study projects in the two governing authorities. It researches each of the governing authority's approaches to transparency, stakeholder inclusion and consultation, the role of communities as stakeholders, and the differing role and position of that of First Nation communities in the consultation and delivery of infrastructure projects that impact their traditional lands.This study argues that greater transparency and stakeholder inclusion is essential throughout the procurement and delivery project cycle to ensure that the interests of the public are protected in the decision-making process of the procurement and delivery of public infrastructure. In-depth, the approach to transparency, the inclusion of the community as stakeholders in the procurement process and the recognition of First Nation communities as integral stakeholders in projects is explored in terms of its application in the projects beyond their stated positions in government literature, outlining the barriers to them.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Wilkinson, Sara and MacDonald, Heather |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Canada; case study; governance; government; outlining; participation; public infrastructure; public private partnerships; reasoning; stakeholder |
| Index terms: | transparency, decision-making process, public infrastructure, reasoning, procurement process, stakeholder participation, land, infrastructure project, case study, transport infrastructure, governance, Canada, public private partnership, partnership |
| Subjects: | Geography, professional development, data collection methods, real estate economics, business, partnership management, community and social dimensions, cognitive psychology, infrastructure and transport systems, decision analysis, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Urban Studies, Risk Management, Governance, Geographical Context, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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