Luo, L; Liu, Y; Yang, Y; Xie, J and Wu, G (2025) Interactive roles of megaproject governance mechanisms and their effects on governance performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(9), pp. 5943-5964. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose - This study aims to explore the interaction of “contractual governance – relational governance – governmental governance” mechanisms and proposes hypotheses about the effects of megaproject governance on governance performance from both theoretical and practical perspectives. Design/methodology/approach - In this paper, a megaproject governance model is developed to explain the relationship between governance mechanisms and governance performance. The model is based on related literature and explores the interactions between governance mechanisms and how they work to improve governance performance. The structural equation model (SEM) is adopted to explore the influence path on governance performance for megaprojects. Findings - The results indicate that: (a) The findings highlight the positive role of project governance mechanisms on governance performance. (b) Contractual governance, relational governance, and governmental governance directly affect governance performance. In addition, contractual governance mediates governance performance through relational governance and governmental governance; governmental governance mediates governance performance through contractual governance and relational governance. (c) Contractual governance, relational governance, and governmental governance play a positive role in governance performance. Research limitations/implications - Governmental governance is added to project governance theory and the empirical research method is used to explore the interaction between contractual governance, relational governance, and governmental governance of megaprojects. The SEM is used to systematically explore the paths of megaproject governance mechanisms on governance performance, considering the interactive role of the “contractual governance - relational governance - governmental governance” and the mediating role. Practical implications - The study reveals the impact path of multidimensional megaproject governance mechanisms on governance performance. In this paper, the empirical findings can help the project participants by providing a decision-making basis for good governance and references for the governments to promote the construction of a micro-institutional environment for megaprojects. Originality/value - The contributions of this study are (1) to add an exploration of governmental governance to the existing project governance theory, and (2) to consider the interactions of the "contractual governance – relational governance – governmental governance" mechanisms, and (3) to explore their effects on governance performance, including direct and mediating effects. This study contributes to a comprehensive understanding of megaproject governance by considering governmental governance and the interactions of the three governance mechanisms. Understanding the impact of megaproject governance on governance performance could assist project stakeholders and provide decision guidance for good governance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | governance mechanisms; governance performance; governmental governance; megaprojects; structural equation model |
| Index terms: | methodology, decision-making, exploration, project stakeholder, megaproject, structural equation model, interaction, governance |
| Subjects: | business, sociology, decision analysis, statistical analysis, environmental resource management, strategic project management, behavioral psychology, research methods |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Sustainability, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Research Practice |
| 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