Liou, F M; Yang, C H; Chen, B and Chen, W (2011) Identifying the Pareto-front approximation for negotiations of BOT contracts with a multi-objective genetic algorithm. Construction Management and Economics, 29(5), pp. 535-548. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
The build-operate-transfer (BOT) project is formulated based upon cooperative partnerships among various public and private parties. Win-win negotiation solutions are especially essential for parties that usually have conflicts of interests. A simulation-based multi-objective genetic algorithm (SMOGA) procedure is developed to address conflicts among the objectives of three parties: government and consumer interests that focus on users' rights and social welfare; the private investor's pursuit of profit maximization; and lenders who want to control the solvency risk of the concessionaire. Taking the Kaohsiung cable car project in Taiwan as an example, the SMOGA procedure is used to seek terms and conditions lying on or near the Pareto frontier for BOT projects with multi-objectives. Monte Carlo simulation is conducted first to determine the project risks and generate the sample data used as the input of the genetic algorithm (GA). The GA subsequently generates a number of combinations of concessional terms and conditions that approximately and simultaneously optimize the three conflicting objectives. The GA-generated approximate Pareto frontier provides a decision space of financial and concessional terms and conditions that satisfies all parties and facilitates the negotiations of BOT contracts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build-operate-transfer; genetic algorithms; monte carlo simulation; pareto frontier |
| Index terms: | profit, partnership, Monte Carlo simulation, concessionaire, build-operate-transfer, conflicts of interest, win-win negotiation, genetic algorithm, negotiation, maximization, Taiwan, investor |
| Subjects: | contract type, sociology, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, professional ethics, conflict resolution, modelling and simulation, partnership management, algorithms, Geography |
| Topics: | Procurement, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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