تخصیص ریسک ترجیحی در مشارکت پروژه های دولتی - خصوصی چین (PPP)
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|3525||2010||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : International Journal of Project Management, Volume 28, Issue 5, July 2010, Pages 482–492
As part of a comprehensive research into PPP implementation, a two-round Delphi survey was conducted with experienced practitioners to identify the preference of risk allocation in China’s PPP projects. The results show that the public sector would take sole responsibility for the risk “Expropriation and nationalization”, and take the majority of responsibility for 12 other risks related to government or government officials and their actions. Fourteen risks which neither the public nor private sector may be able to deal with them alone are preferred to be shared equally. The private sector would take the majority of responsibility for 10 risks that are at the project level. Interestingly, no risk fell into the category that should be solely allocated to the private sector. Further analysis of the reasons behind these allocation preferences was then conducted. Recommendations on commercial principles and contract terms between the public authorities and private consortia are also made.
The Public–private partnership (PPP) form of procurement is recognized as an effective way of delivering value-for-money public infrastructure or services. It seeks to combine the advantages of competitive tendering and flexible negotiation, and to allocate risk on an agreed basis between the public sector and the private sector (Li et al., 2005). Since a transparent procurement process is regarded as critical to the success of PPP projects (Jefferies et al., 2002), it is important that risk allocation is clearly communicated and understood between the parties. It is thus essential for public clients and private bidders to evaluate all of the potential risks throughout the whole project life. Public and private sector bodies must place particular attention on the procurement process while negotiating contracts for PPP to ensure a fair risk allocation between them. In recent years there have been an increasing market of PPP for the development and operation of infrastructure projects in China. With the fast pace of market-oriented transformation in the planned economy of China, a delicate balance has to be sought among private sector capacity, government regulatory function, and public satisfaction. This paper attempts to develop an equitable risk allocation scheme for the delivery of PPP projects in China. The research findings will contribute to both the practice and research in risk management for China’s PPP projects and also provide valuable information for those international companies intending to invest in infrastructure construction in China.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This paper has studied the allocation preferences of risks in China’s PPP projects. The identified risk allocation preference would help the public and private sectors achieve a balance of distribution of responsibilities and risks and thus reduce the time and cost of contract negotiation. According to the analysis, only 1 out of the 37 risks (“Expropriation and nationalization”) was solely allocated to the public sector. Twelve risks to be mostly allocated to the public sector were identified, which were all related to government or government officers and their actions. There were 14 risks in the equally shared risk category option. The nature of these risk factors makes it difficult for either the public or the private sector to deal with it alone. The private sector should take the majority of responsibilities for the remaining 10 risks, which all belong to the project level risks. Interestingly, no risk fell into the category that should be solely allocated to the private sector. Hence, another observation which can be made is that PPP procurement for construction projects in China has not achieved the objective of full risk transfer from the public sector to the private sector such as in the UK. Reasons behind these allocation preferences and recommendations on the commercial principles or contract terms between the government and private consortium are also provided in this paper.