Cost performance of public infrastructure projects: the nemesis and nirvana of change-orders

Abstract

Bradford Scholars -how to deposit your paper Overview Copyright check• Check if your publisher allows submission to a repository.• Use the Sherpa RoMEO database if you are not sure about your publisher's position or email openaccess@bradford.ac.uk.

Sustainable Urbanization and Development Goals Strategy through Public–Private Partnerships in a South-Asian Metropolis

“…So this issue is addressed by [37] in which they develop the methodology of sequential triangulation to examine the effectiveness of a "Process Management Life Cycle Performance Measurement System". Furthermore, through life management (TLM) benefit achievements, the 3P model has to be restructured to secure incentivization headed for TLM and include TLM at the level of the production structure as described by [35]. However, detailed investigation of this area is out of scope of this paper's objective.…”

“…Such as, they are prone to facing cost overruns, time delays (pre-construction contracts preparation etc. ), harmonizing the public and private organizations, lack of flexibility concomitant with long-term agreements, higher capital costs and not carrying projected value during their maintenance and operation phases [35,36]. Further, the poor performance of 3Ps is due to the lack of an operative and comprehensive performance measurement arrangement.…”

Nexus of Interorganizational Trust, Principled Negotiation, and Joint Action for Improved Cost Performance: Survey of Chinese Megaprojects

“…Generally, addressing cost performance issues revolves around project planning and scheduling (Flyvbjerg et al 2004;Doloi 2011), contracts and tendering (Lee and Hwang 2007), cost management and prediction (Love et al 2017), and project team management (Scott-Young and Samson 2008). Previous studies often adopt a deterministic approach in identifying the various causes of cost overrun in megaprojects (Olaniran et al 2015;Siemiatycki 2018) and give only generic suggestions for mitigating and containing such issues (Olawale and Sun 2010;Kim et al 2017).…”

Future-proofing ‘Next Generation’ infrastructure assets

“…Changes in scope that occur during the construction of assets because of complexity, uncertainty and mismanagement are some of the usual culprits. These changes of scope, for example, may not only result in an increase or decrease in capital expenditure (CAPEX) (Love et al, 2017;Invernizzi et al, 2018), but also influence the ability to provide added-value during operations and maintenance. Increases or decreases in CAPEX, adversely impact an asset owner's ability to provide effective and efficient goods and services as well as taxpayers, contractors and their supply chains' profitability.…”

“…Increases or decreases in CAPEX, adversely impact an asset owner's ability to provide effective and efficient goods and services as well as taxpayers, contractors and their supply chains' profitability. As a result, this hinders an asset owners' ability to secure infrastructure that is both resilient to unexpected events and adaptable to changing needs, uses or capacities (Love et al, 2017).…”