Sherratt, F; Sherratt, S and Ivory, C (2020) Challenging complacency in construction management research: The case of PPPs. Construction Management and Economics, 38(12), pp. 1086-1100. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are joint ventures in which the private sector works in partnership with government bodies to deliver public sector projects with the intention to deliver them more quickly, efficiently and with better value for money. They are also one of the most contentious project delivery mechanisms to have been mobilised in recent decades. Research has demonstrated the lack of realised value within many such projects, yet construction management academics continue to examine ways of increasing, implementing and optimising this approach in practice, even encouraging its adoption worldwide despite growing social and political dissatisfaction. Here, we go beyond what we see as myopic construction management perspectives, placing our body of work firmly within wider economic, political and social contexts. We challenge uncritical academic compliance with a process that demonstrably contributes to economic inequalities, opportunism and exploitation. We confront the lack of criticality in construction management research of PPPs, and call for construction management academics to broaden their research focus and engage in more robust critique and analysis of construction systems, as they are realised in practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | academic compliance; critical theory; economics; PFI; PPP |
| Index terms: | compliance, management research, opportunism, construction system, value-for-money, partnership, private sector, exploitation, public sector, critique, joint venture, project delivery, placing, inequality |
| Subjects: | concrete and cementitious materials, management, evaluation, health safety and environment, building construction, sociology, partnership management, administrative law, industry analysis, business, research design and methodology, evaluation and assessment methods, project delivery |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Ethics, Value Management, Legal Issues, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Business Strategy, Health and Safety |
| 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