Oliveros-Romero, J and Aibinu, A A (2019) Ex post impact evaluation of PPP projects: An exploratory research. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 9(2), pp. 315-330. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore, in literature and practice, the use of ex post impact evaluations within the public–private partnership (PPP) context and understand the major considerations for developing a PPP ex post impact evaluation method. Design/methodology/approach: This paper applies exploratory research through expert interviews from Chile and Australia to describe: the relevance of this kind of evaluation, and the challenges of designing and conducting a PPP ex post evaluation. Findings: The study confirms the lack of a formal method for evaluating the impact of a PPP project. Experts agree on the relevance of performing ex post evaluations to PPP projects and that in practice there is no formal procedure to follow. Among other challenges, experts discussed four general ex post evaluation aims: transparency and accountability, PPP legitimization, industry learning and government agency learning. Research limitations/implications: This study confirms the gap in knowledge and contributes to the developments of approaches to perform ex post impact evaluation of PPP projects. It also provides several suggestions that need to be addressed when attempting to evaluate PPPs beyond the financial and contractual parameters. Originality/value: The topic is not fully addressed in the literature, and this study contributes to the initial discussion and development of this evaluation method, which is considered significant for the development of public infrastructure.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | ex post evaluation; impact evaluation; project management; public–private partnerships; qualitative research; stakeholders |
| Index terms: | interview, government agency, public infrastructure, partnership, accountability, Australia, qualitative research, methodology, exploratory research, Chile, project management, transparency |
| Subjects: | liability law, administrative law, infrastructure and transport systems, partnership management, professional development, project management theory and practice, Geography, research methods, research design and methodology, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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