Faisal, Fahim (2016) The role of government and development partner certification in public-private partnership infrastructure project financing. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
The thesis tests whether certification by government and development partners is related to the choice of project modality and private sector ownership in PPP projects. Results show certification by government and development partners significantly promotes PPP investment under a risky modality, specifically through encouraging private sector ownership. The study has practical implications as certification by government and development partners can assure private investors about PPP project quality.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | How, Janice; Verhoeven, Peter and Bridge, Adrian |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | infrastructure financing; public private partnership; certification; project financing; project modality; private sector ownership |
| Index terms: | private sector, partnership, investor, infrastructure project, public private partnership, ownership, infrastructure financing, certification, financing |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, contractual arrangements, financial risk, economics, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, administrative processes, sociology, partnership management |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design, Contract Administration, Engineering Principles, Procurement |
| 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