Valuation techniques for infrastructive investment decisions

Garvin, M J and Cheah, C Y J (2004) Valuation techniques for infrastructive investment decisions. Construction Management and Economics, 22(4), pp. 373-383. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Public infrastructure owners are increasingly soliciting BOT arrangements to deliver needed infrastructure facilities. Such arrangements potentially preserve a public owner's capital capacity for allocation to projects that cannot support themselves by essentially 'pulling' projects from the private sector. Before soliciting these arrangements, however, owners should independently evaluate a project's economic viability to fully appraise the issues and variables involved. Unfortunately, project analysts often apply evaluation methods without regard for their assumptions and limitations. A case study of a toll road project in the USA provides the basis for examining the assumptions behind both traditional and option valuation models. The case demonstrates the use of an option pricing model to augment traditional project evaluation by capturing strategic considerations, in this case the value of project deferment. The presentation illustrates that the selection of a valuation model depends critically upon the characteristics of a project's variables and that informed judgment remains an integral part of the decision-making process.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: infrastructure investments; real options; risk neutrality; valuation techniques
Index terms: toll, public owner, case study, judgment, public infrastructure, pricing, neutrality, infrastructure investment, decision-making process, owner, private sector, option, investment decision, project evaluation, road project, real option
Subjects: ethical practice, economic analysis, data collection methods, dispute resolution, value management, sociology, decision analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, transportation engineering, infrastructure engineering
Topics: Legal Issues, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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