The Scientific Problems with the Mega Infrastructure Construction Management Theory

Exploring Decision-Making Complexity in Major Infrastructure Projects: A Case Study From China

“…Meanwhile, originating from Simon's definition of decision making, we treat decision-making quality from two perspectives based on the behavioral decision theory, namely the quality of the process that is applied to create the decision-making scheme and the decision-making scheme quality itself. That is, decisionmaking quality could be perceived from the perspective of a combination of process and outcome (Froschauer, 2010;Sheng, 2018c). The quality of the decision-making process involves the decision-making organization, procedures, hierarchical principal-agent relationship between decision makers, and behavioral norms, all of which refer to whether the decision-making process is legal, open, transparent, and enabling public and expert participation, and whether there is information loss, information monopoly, and behavior variation.…”

“…The quality of the decision-making process involves the decision-making organization, procedures, hierarchical principal-agent relationship between decision makers, and behavioral norms, all of which refer to whether the decision-making process is legal, open, transparent, and enabling public and expert participation, and whether there is information loss, information monopoly, and behavior variation. The quality of the decision-making outcomes is reflected in the robustness of the decision-making scheme regarding the changes and evolution of construction scenarios (Sheng, 2018c). Regarding the evaluation of decision-making quality, under the premise of paying attention to the actual objective function and effect of the decision scheme when solving the decision problem, the decision makers' degree of satisfaction and values and intentions can be considered.…”

“…On the other hand, the decision-making process should be understood as a behavior chain of a self-adaptable organization that is composed of multiple subjects and a complex system, rather than a set of activities comprised of normative and procedural steps. This means that the decision-making process is composed of numerous decision-making complexities (Sheng, 2018c). Moreover, as Simon (1972) indicates, decision makers are rationally bound by incomplete information; decision-making complexity can be perceived as the rational boundary and as the obstacle that prohibits formally rational (i.e., optimizing) decision making.…”

“…In practice, it is not uncommon to find that neglecting the overall and systematic analysis of decision-making complexity has led to unfulfilled functions and objectives of MIPs, and furthermore, has posed great danger to socio-economic and natural environments (Sheng, 2018c). For instance, in the decision making with regard to the reservoir water level in the case of the Sanmenxia Dam of China, complex interdependencies with sedimentation problems upstream were overlooked, resulting in sediment accumulation that caused severe flooding of the Wei River upstream (Wang et al, 2005).…”