Casady, C B and Baxter, D (2020) Pandemics, public-private partnerships (PPPs), and force majeure: COVID-19 expectations and implications. Construction Management and Economics, 38(12), pp. 1077-1085. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is placing unprecedented stress on public-private partnerships (PPPs), creating the real possibility of widespread project failures. The disruption and potential collapse of multiple PPP projects will likely trigger force majeure contractual provisions, but the applicability and efficacy of these generic catch-all clauses remain in question. This critical note therefore discusses the implications of force majeure contractual conditions on PPPs in the COVID-19 epoch. We first define the concept of force majeure as it pertains to pandemics. Next, we review a select number of international policies for such events, outlining their key features and glaring shortcomings. Then, we use Novia Scotia’s Highway 104 Twinning Project as an illustrative case example of improved force majeure risk management. Finally, after reflecting on the three ironies of construction crisis management, we outline the need for swift trust in PPPs during this current pandemic and conclude by calling for a comprehensive revision of force majeure contract provisions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction disputes; COVID-19; force majeure; public-private partnership |
| Index terms: | COVID-19, crisis management, risk management, swift trust theory, placing, coronavirus, construction dispute, project failure, force majeure, pandemic, partnership |
| Subjects: | health conditions and diseases, partnership management, concrete and cementitious materials, health risk and incident analysis, financial risk, psychology, project completion, risk assessment, dispute resolution, mitigation |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Project Management, Construction Materials, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management |
| 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