Merna, A and Smith, N J (1994) Concession contracts for power generation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 1(1), pp. 17-27. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Concession contracts provide a mechanism for transferring the traditional public sector client roles of market research, project appraisal, project financing, operation and maintenance, and revenue generation associated with power station projects to the private sector organizations, formerly only responsible for turnkey design and construction. The recent research work undertaken in the Project Management Group, UMIST, has developed and validated a mechanism for the rapid appraisal of concession contracts. A case study example is presented to illustrate the significant features of the procurement of power projects using concession contracts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | BOOT; concession contract; investment appraisal; power generation; risk management |
| Index terms: | risk management, financing, operation and maintenance, power station, concession contract, public-sector client, project management, design and construction, investment appraisal, power generation, appraisal, private sector organization, market research, revenue, case study, project appraisal |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, project delivery, contractual arrangements, energy systems, factor and component analysis, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, market analysis, project management theory and practice, contract type, data collection methods, maintenance engineering, organization, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Procurement, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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