Pu, W; Xu, F and Marques, R C (2021) A bibliometric and meta-analysis of studies on public-private partnership in China. Construction Management and Economics, 39(9), pp. 773-789. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
China is one of the countries with the highest public-private partnership (PPP) experience. Although numerous studies on PPP in China have been published in different international journals in the past decades, few relevant reviews have been found. In this research, a bibliometric analysis of 139 peer-reviewed articles on PPP in China is performed to reveal the research evolution and trend. Besides, a meta-analysis of 111 empirical articles among the total 139 articles is conducted using multinomial logistic regression to examine how data characteristics and analytical features have been utilized in this area. The major findings suggest that, first, many studies are published in the subject areas of Business, Management and Accounting, and Engineering, and most topics are discussed from the micro-level perspective. Second, the issues in the procurement phase lack enough attention. Third, for studies with different research themes, how data characteristics and analytical features have been utilized significantly differ. In general, how PPP studies are approached in China contrasts with the global PPP research. Future research directions are proposed. The research contributes to the global PPP body of knowledge and methodology by providing the first quantitative review of studies on PPP in China and by combining the research methods.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bibliometric analysis; China; meta-analysis; public-private partnership; review |
| Index terms: | bibliometric analysis, journal, meta-analysis, accounting, body of knowledge, China, evolution, methodology, multinomial, partnership, logistic regression |
| Subjects: | research dissemination and communication, environmental science, knowledge management, economic analysis, Geography, research methods, statistical analysis, partnership management, research evaluation and metrics |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy |
| 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