A Comparison of Construction Contract Prices for Traditionally Procured Roads and Public–Private Partnerships

Blanc-Brude, Frédéric; Goldsmith, Hugh; Välilä, Timo

doi:10.1007/s11151-009-9224-1

Cited by 66 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In between them, there are other alternatives, which take various forms, from management contracts to other types of concessions. These are closer to the first or the second discussed generic solution and are not discussed in this paper 3 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…3 Other approaches, such as management concessions without capital investment, either do not involve (private) money at risk or are variation of one of the two basic approaches presented. 4 We stress that there is a clear difference between the cost (price) of the project and the ability to deliver the project on budget.…”

Section:  Efficiency In Infrastructure Operation;mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Regulatory Asset Base Model and the Project Finance Model: A comparative analysis

Makovšek

2015

International Transport Forum Discussion Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Section:  Efficiency In Infrastructure Operation;mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Regulatory Asset Base Model and the Project Finance Model: A comparative analysis

Makovšek

2015

International Transport Forum Discussion Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Their regression analysis found that the costs of P3s were 24% higher than the traditionally procured projects. Makovšek (2013) argued that the explanation of cost differences estimated in Blanc-Brude et al (2009) might not have been impartial. In addition to construction cost overrun risk premiums, minor scope changes, their timings, and whether these changes are recorded depending on procurement types might also have affected the results, implying that the cost differences between P3s and traditionally procured projects might have been larger.…”

Section: Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Data Review of Transportation Infrastructure Public–Private Partnership: A Meta-Analysis

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The limited understanding of public-private partnerships (P3s) for transportation infrastructure finance has been generally attributed to a lack of data. The more fundamental question of how P3 data are utilized in the literature is more relevant and critical, but remains unclear. This study investigates this question by examining the linkages between research objectives and data characteristics through a meta-analysis of infrastructure P3 studies using multinomial regressions. It analyzes 95 empirical studies that adopt actual data, selected from a P3 research database that includes over 345 studies and are classified into five categories including performance, contract, risk, value for money, and institutional factors. Results show that the case studies are less frequently utilized to understand P3s' institutional issues compared to those that focus on P3s' performance or VFM. Survey data are more frequently used to study P3 contracts rather than issues related to P3 project risk. We highlight the need for policy-makers to require continuing disclosure of P3 performance for validating the effectiveness of the procurement model and to improve the practice.

show abstract

“…Supporters of private management claim that the private sector can provide public services more efficiently than governments, but critics claim that private companies will prioritize economic revenues over the quality and safety of services. Empirical evidence of the productive performance of road investment, as between PPPs and traditional procurement, is limited and findings show mixed results (Blanc-Brude et al, 2009;Raisbek et al, 2010;Chasey et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Private Partnership Management Effects on Road Safety Outcomes

Albalate

Bel-Piñana

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public Private Partnerships (PPP) have become common in providing high-quality infrastructure in many countries worldwide. One of the main reasons for PPP agreements is to improve efficiency and quality in the delivery of public services, as well as to boost investments for expensive projects.Despite PPPs having been particularly widespread in the case of the construction and rehabilitation of high-capacity road infrastructure, their impact in terms of road safety outcomes is still unexplored. This paper studies the effects of PPPs on road safety outcomes by taking advantage of the variety of management models provided in the Spanish highway network. Results based on a panel-data fixed-effects method show that the most relevant aspect influencing road safety outcomes is the quality of design of the road. However, we find strong evidence suggesting that privately operated highways perform better in terms of road safety outcomes than publicly operated highways, for roads with a similar quality of design.

show abstract

A Comparison of Construction Contract Prices for Traditionally Procured Roads and Public–Private Partnerships

Abstract: Public–private partnerships, Risk transfer, Construction cost, European roads, L33, H54, C51,

Cited by 66 publications

References 17 publications

The Regulatory Asset Base Model and the Project Finance Model: A comparative analysis

The Regulatory Asset Base Model and the Project Finance Model: A comparative analysis

Data Review of Transportation Infrastructure Public–Private Partnership: A Meta-Analysis

Public Private Partnership Management Effects on Road Safety Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About