Huang, Y L and Chou, S P (2006) Valuation of the minimum revenue guarantee and the option to abandon in BOT infrastructure projects. Construction Management and Economics, 24(4), pp. 379-389. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The real option approach is used to value the minimum revenue guarantee (MRG) and the option to abandon in Build-Operate-Transfer infrastructure projects. The option to abandon is formulated under an investment option held by the concessionaire at contract signing and to expire before construction commencement. MRG is formulated as a series of European style put options in a single option pricing model. When combined with the option to abandon in the pre-construction phase, MRG is reconstructed as a series of European style call options to develop a compound option pricing formula. The Taiwan High-Speed Rail Project is chosen as a numerical case to apply the formulas. The results show both MRG and the option to abandon can create values. When MRG and the option to abandon are combined, they will counteract each other and their values will thus be reduced. Increasing the MRG level will decrease the value of the option to abandon, and, at a certain MRG level, the option to abandon will be rendered worthless.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bot; infrastructure; minimum revenue guarantee; option to abandon; real option |
| Index terms: | revenue, build-operate-transfer, infrastructure project, Taiwan, guarantee, pricing, real option, option, pre-construction, concessionaire, railway construction |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, Geography, decision analysis, contract structure, contractual arrangements, project delivery, economic analysis, contract type, civil engineering |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Business Strategy, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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