Liu, T and Wilkinson, S (2013) Can the pilot public-private partnerships project be applied in future urban rail development? A case study of Beijing Metro Line 4 project. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 3(2), pp. 250-263. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: This purpose of this paper is to evaluate the experiences of public-private partnerships (PPPs) in China's urban rail development, investigates the critical factors impacting on the project viability and derives lessons for future urban rail PPP projects in China and elsewhere. Design/methodology/approach: A case study of the Beijing Metro Line 4 project was adopted as the main research method with semi-structured interviews with senior practitioners and experienced academics as the primary data collection instrument. Qualitative data were collected and subjected to content analysis. Findings: The case study provides six critical factors which are required to facilitate PPP urban rail development: streamlined approval process; robust tendering; strong leadership within the public procuring authority; effective organisational structure and the private sector innovation; commensurate charging approach and government subsidising scheme; and appropriate risk allocation. The research shows that the potential to directly re-apply the Beijing Metro Line 4 model to future urban rail development is limited, but lessons for future urban rail PPPs can still be drawn from the study. Practical implications: The paper serves as an illustration to public procuring authorities and potential private investors on how to structure and manage urban rail PPPs. Originality/value: The research presents an original investigation of China's first urban rail PPP, the Beijing Metro Line 4 project and assesses the applicability of the Beijing model to future PPP projects in urban rail development.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; China; public-private partnerships; rail transport; urban rail development |
| Index terms: | investor, approval, interview, case study, organizational structure, private sector, partnership, content analysis, critical factor, methodology, practitioner, risk allocation, investigation, Beijing, China |
| Subjects: | research methods, financial risk, Geography, sociology, partnership management, industry analysis, contractual role, risk assessment, data collection methods, practitioner, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Contract Administration, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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