Xenidis, Y and Angelides, D (2005) The financial risks in build-operate-transfer projects. Construction Management and Economics, 23(4), pp. 431-441. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The build-operate transfer (BOT) approach for developing infrastructure projects is a technique that allows fast realization of public works in cases of a shortage of public funds. This process is full of risks, due mainly to the complexity and extend of the disciplines, public agencies and stakeholders involved. The identification, classification and presentation of a comprehensive list of this type of risks will provide BOT project practitioners with a useful tool in the effort of setting up successfully a BOT concession agreement. The approach presented provides a practical insight into 27 financial risks, which are associated with the BOT projects in their lifecycle. This is achieved through proper justification and description of the content of each risk. Furthermore, a categorization of the risks is presented, according to the stage at which they occur and the sources of their origin. The findings of this research would facilitate the risk analysis process that is being conducted by risk managers prior to bidding for a BOT project and during the negotiation period.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bot projects; finance; project management; risk |
| Index terms: | infrastructure project, risk analysis, complexity, negotiation, agency, project management, public work, build-operate-transfer, risk manager, bidding, lifecycle, practitioner |
| Subjects: | sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, project management theory and practice, practitioner, bidding, conflict resolution, infrastructure engineering, systems engineering, project delivery, environmental hazards, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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