Narbaev, T; De Marco, A and Orazalin, N (2020) A multi-disciplinary meta-review of the public-private partnerships research. Construction Management and Economics, 38(2), pp. 109-125. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Public-private partnerships (PPP) research is very diverse. This field of research covers different topics across multiple disciplines and is disseminated in many journals. This has led to numerous review studies with a single discipline focus that apply mostly subjective or descriptive analyses. With the purpose of providing an integrated overview of all the disciplines that involve PPP and uncovering connections between these, this research provides an extensive PPP literature meta-review that uses objective bibliometric measures on 1970 articles from 773 journals. The methodology involves ranking journals, identifying topical trends over 1989–2018, and clustering the literature to create a PPP knowledge map with associated research domains. The findings reaffirm that PPP is not only a multi-disciplinary research area but also a self-contained meta-discipline that integrates some allied disciplines with their foundational theories. The PPP meta-discipline is largely dominated by Construction Management and Economics (CME), Public Administration and Management, and Transportation Research disciplines, and integrates emerging topics such as sustainability, governance and stakeholders management. This study contributes to the CME scholarly community as it offers the first comprehensive meta-analysis of PPP literature and helps understanding PPP under the lens of a multi-disciplinary perspective.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bibliometrics; literature review; meta-review; private finance initiatives; public-private partnerships |
| Index terms: | partnership, governance, clustering, journal, literature review, meta-analysis, bibliometrics, methodology, private finance initiative |
| Subjects: | research methods, partnership management, research evaluation and metrics, research dissemination and communication, business, data science, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Information Management, Research Practice, Governance, Procurement, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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