Ampratwum, G; Tam, V W Y and Osei-Kyei, R (2023) Critical analysis of risks factors in using public-private partnership in building critical infrastructure resilience: A systematic review. Construction Innovation, 23(2), pp. 360-382. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: Public–private partnership (PPP) has been adopted in many areas especially within the architecture, engineering and construction research domain. However, the PPP in critical infrastructure resilience (CIR) has not received the needed attention even though it has been acclaimed to be the panacea for building infrastructure resilience. This paper aims to adopt a systematic review to proactively identify the risks factors that pertains to using PPP as a mechanism to build the resilience of critical infrastructure. Design/methodology/approach: Using a systematic methodology, a total record of 51 academic publications and 5 institutional reports from reputable organizations were identified and analyzed. Findings: The selected literature was subjected to content analysis to retrieve 46 risk factors in PPP in CIR. The outcome of the systematic revealed the topmost risks as corruption, natural and unavoidable catastrophes, wars, terrorism, sabotage, cost overrun issues, a lack of centralized mechanism for coordinating integrated actions, inconsistent government policies, inadequate supervision, high operational cost due to robust and redundant measure, lack of supporting infrastructure, lack of open and integrated communication, unstable government, political interference, lack of PPP experience and legislation change. A conceptual framework was developed by grouping the identified risks under 13 categories. Research limitations/implications: The outcome of this study will be a guide for decision makers and stakeholders with the responsibility of building the resilience of critical infrastructure. Originality/value: The study contributes to CIR research area by providing an in-depth knowledge on risks that are inherent in PPP in CIR.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cir risks; critical infrastructure; PPP; resilience; risks; systematic literature |
| Index terms: | risk factor, partnership, infrastructure resilience, government policy, publication, content analysis, systematic literature review, conceptual framework, legislation, corruption, war, cost overrun, methodology, terrorism, critical infrastructure, supervision |
| Subjects: | research dissemination and communication, research evaluation and metrics, legal systems, infrastructure and transport systems, terrorism studies, partnership management, financial and cost management, risk management, control systems, data analysis and analytics, professional ethics, theoretical framing, environmental hazards, conflict and crisis studies, public policy, research methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Urban Studies, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Information Management, Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Legal Issues, Sustainability |
| 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