Risk Management In Public-Private Partnership Projects: A Knowledge-Based Essay.

This assessment requires the student to produce a research report that details the research problem, explore current knowledge as published in recent literature, demonstrate the importance of the research and outline the research method for data collection and analysis. The final report should highlight the research findings as well as provide reasoned and supported conclusions and recommendation based on the research findings.

This chapter aims at building the skeletal outline of the main question of research in this study. The research question of this study is: what should be part of the risk management in Public-Private Partnership projects and how should such be included.  

The background of the study as well as an introduction to Public-Private Partnership will be presented initially before they are followed by the purpose, research aim and objectives, a brief introduction to Public-Private Partnership and then the limitations of this thesis report. An outline of the later chapters will close the thesis chapter (Waring, Currie & Bishop, 2013). The focus of this report will primarily be on the adoption of risk management in Public-Private Partnership projects that are related to infrastructure. Public-Private Partnership projects are those projects which adopt a Public-Private Partnership model in the full life cycle of the project.  

For numerous years now, Public-Private Partnership model has been in use in the construction sector. Just like any other initiative or model, Public-Private Partnership has two sides: the merits and demits. Alongside the praise and applause for its benefits, the presence of controversy and blame are as well vivid and real for its shortcomings (Sharma and Bindal, 2014, p. 1271). Owing to the acute financial crisis that was experienced in the year 2008, a significant amount of interest has been on the verge of increase in carrying out Public-Private Partnership projects in most of the countries around the globe.

Such a scenario is attributed to the inadequacy of funds as well as the realization of the importance of the investments of the private enterprises by the various governments of countries (Grimsey and Lewis, 2002, p. 110). The same situations are as well experience in China, thereby prompting the Chinese government to actively engage in the encouragement of the construction of Public-Private Partnership projects.

As PPP projects have managed to attract more attention than ever, a consideration of the risk management of PPP projects is worth being considered in order to eliminate doubts of governments. As a result, it is of importance to conduct and analysis as well as control of the risks of PPP projects and illustrates the chances of bringing them down. References will be made to global scientific researches related to PPP or PPP projects in some of the nations or all over the world followed by certain specific scenarios in the field of the construction industry of China (Yeung, et al 2010, p. 940).

Problem Statement

With the increase in the current clause ‘knowledge risk management,’ that illustrates the interaction of risks management and knowledge management, the chances of a relationship between risk management and knowledge management have been justified.  

The main purpose of this study is to examine the risk management in which the greatest important duo parts are risk allocation and risk mitigation strategy of PPP projects (Perry & Hayes, 1985 p. 500). In a bid to attain this objective, an elaborate search into the existing works of literature will be conducted and the findings of that will be the return in the chapter that discusses the findings. One more major purpose of the study is the knowledge risk management of Public-Private Partnership projects that are to be discussed later in the chapters.  

Yet another cause of desire in the writing of this report borrows from the reports that there are implementations at higher frequencies of more Public-Private Partnership projects in China, offering an excellent opportunity to get to understand this model more elaborately by performing this thesis.

 The research questions of this thesis are:

• What should be part of the risk management in Public-Private Partnership projects?
• How should such parts be included?

The main aim of this thesis project is to develop a risk identification and management strategic system in PPP projects using a knowledge-based approach. Risks are inherent in all projects and they arise as a result of uncertain future outcomes which can have direct impacts on the whole project (Perry & Hayes, 1985 p. 500). The risk allocation to the contract parties and its management which hence cause a PPP design that establishes an element of the business project.

This will be achieved through the research of the following objectives:

1. To analyze the major risks which occur both locally and internationally in the PPP projects
2. To develop a knowledge-based approach in establishing the assessment of risks in PPP projects
3. To develop a case study on PPP projects (Warner & Sullivan, 2017)
4. To develop a conceptual framework which will monitor the strategies that will govern Public-Private Partnership in the construction industry

In a bid to attained the aforementioned aims and objectives, the research, secondary data will be adopted in conjunction with the literature review

Chapter 1 Introduction provides an overview of the master among them the background, the purpose of the report, research questions, research aims and objectives, research methodology which describes the approach that will be used in attaining the aims and objectives of the study.

Chapter 2 Literature Review provides a literature of the previous works on introduction to PPP projects, worldwide context about PPP projects risks identification in PPP contracts and the various types of risks associated with PPP projects and then closing with an illustration of the gap in knowledge which are the various kinds of risks in PPP projects which result in the obtaining of the research aim and objectives.

Research Questions

Chapter 3 Method generates the strategies that are demonstrated and adopted in the report

Chapter 4 Findings which encompasses an overview of the works of literature in which all the outcomes from the philosophies are converged.

Chapter 5 Discussion offers insights and elaborate explanations of the findings that are obtained in the preceding chapter as well as some individual or own thoughts

Chapter 6 Conclusion offers a summary of not just for the works of literature but as well as the discussion chapter.

Background of Public-Private Partnership Project

There has been an ever growing tendency of involvement of the private sector in the provision of transport facilities of high standards aimed at attaining the needs of rapid economic growth. For numerous years now, the public sector has remained to be the conventional financer and operator of the infrastructure projects through the use of the resources collected from taxes as well as other different levies including fuel taxes and charges on road users (Edwards and Bowen, 1998, p. 340).

Nonetheless, the recent difference between the resource generation capacity and the demand for various new facilities has promoted the governments to find new methods of funding and sources. This has led to very many countries at the moment contemplating Public Private Partnership as one of the arrangement made between the private and public sectors in a bid to finance, operate, construct, design and maintain the public infrastructure, the community facilities as well as associated services (Lee, 2001, p. 330).

In general terms, a Private Public Partnership could be defined as a long-term relationship that exists between the private and the public sectors that has the purpose of generating public services as well as infrastructure. The private-public partnership brings together the public and the private sector together in long-term contracts. The private-public partnership is composed of unconditional and voluntary agreements and understanding, agreements at service levels and private and outsourcing finance initiatives (Carbonara, Costantino & Pellegrino, 2014). Figure 1 below shows an illustration of the PPPs Hub.

A private-public partnership project thus often involves the offering of a conventional public sector service and can be composed of an avalanche of options. The general idea behind the concept is the mobilization to utilize the capital of the private sector in the generation of various economic developments as well as the delivery of the value for money to the public sector alongside the higher costs of financing in the private sector. The level of returns as demanded by the investors in the private sector must be lower than the whole-life costs and enhanced transfer of risks (Chen et al., 2013).

Research Aim and Objectives

One of the main objectives of private-public partnership is the development of the various infrastructure projects among them schools, hospitals as well as roads without necessarily bringing on board the response to the limited nature of the capital that is usually available in the public sector and making use of the superior cash and the capacity of project management of the private sector.

Various types of PPP projects have been adopted in the development of infrastructure around the world. The limitation in the availability of financial resources to the public sector that may be used in financing the development of infrastructure has facilitated countries in Europe, Africa, Asia, North, South, and Central America to adopt private investment as one of the promising alternatives of realizing various economic developments. As from the records of World Bank, to the tune of 662 transport projects were completed between 1990 and 2001 with private participation which attracted an investment to the tune of $135 billion. A summary of some of the biggest PPP projects is as shown in table 1, which illustrates their social features as well as the extent of involvement of the private sector.

Table 1: Transportation PPP Projects worldwide

Other than dangers which may strike any extend of foundation venture, various gatherings of dangers will probably come up in a PPP venture. Such dangers are characterized as PPP-particular. They originate from the specific connection between people in general and the private substances the two of which have monetary interests that are unmistakably packaged in the task:

• The parties have fluctuated targets to meet
• The government ordinarily keeps the lingering proprietorship even as the task of fund is exchanged to a private area (Chou and Pramudawardhani, 2015)
• The parties have fluctuated prospects for the broadening of dangers.

In as much as the legally binding refinement passing by these bearings may not be clear in genuine practice, it is still of the pith to endeavor an investigation of which of the hazard are particularly connected with a PPP venture or generally tend to improve in a PPP structure (Yang, Hou and Wang, 2013).

There are three main groups of PPP-specific risks: fiscal risks, bidding risks and residual value risks all of which are further split as discussed below:

Open Private Partnership gives the legislature an instrument that is can use in mitigating the monetary contracts identified with the change to the arrangement of street framework. The private assets can henceforth be used in spanning the budgetary hole which happens in various nations between the necessities of foundation and the current open assets (Chung and Hensher, 2015). In any case, the complex idea of PPP ventures and the deficiency of the benchmarks about their monetary bookkeeping and revealing make provisos that enable PPPs to be embraced in the bypassing of open use control. The financial dangers are assembled into two: unforeseen obligation related dangers and monetary venture dangers.

Research Methodology

Contingent liability risk defines the variation in the fiscal expenditure initiated by future uncertain events under the utilization of the guarantees of the government. It is often an indirect risk and the fiscal variability is often being triggered by factors that are associated with the project that has the guarantee extended (Cooper et al., 2014).

Under the framework of a PPP, the government has very simple justifications for relocating public investment and knocking it off the budget as well as the elimination of the government debt from the balance sheet despite still nearing the implicit or explicit fiscal risk that results from ownership of the residual asset. Still, the partnership that is behind such an arrangement is in a position to provide reasons for offering government guarantee in a simpler manner than the conventional financing or complete contracting out (Cruz & Marques, 2013).

This thus means that a resort to the guarantees in a bid to secure private financing may lead to exposure of the government to the hidden and mostly higher costs than the conventional financing. Such contingent liabilities have the ability to complicate the budget management and financial risks as a result of lack of transparency. In as much as such a risk may most likely be higher especially in the developing nation which has more pervasive problems of fiscal transparency and accounting, some developed countries as well have significant concerns (De Schepper, Dooms & Haezendonck, 2014).

Attributable to the way that PPP contracts out in the open framework are transcendently started by the administration, all the more particularly the BOT-type contracts, despite everything they remain a financial strategy apparatus and affect the total interest. PPPs can sophisticate monetary arrangement administration whether they have unexpected liabilities dangers appended to them or not as a miniaturized scale adjustment device. For instance, in light of the current situation of high total interest, inflationary weights, and high capital inflows, changing the customary capital use to the private segment from people in general segment and henceforth bringing down the spending shortage, may compound weight of residential interest while producing the deceptive impression of adjustment in the monetary arrangement. Residential interest weights may increment should the present use be substituted in the financial plan for capital use (De Vries & Yehoue, 2013).

As illustrated by the recent experience by the U.S. with Chicago Skyway and Indiana Toll Road, the concession of the road infrastructure may offer a large upfront funding to a government. Even in circumstances when the amounts of allocation of money are less spectacular, the manner of allocation and expenditure of the money can invoke variability and hence risk which may occur in the financial position of the concessionaire and the government (DeCorla-Souza et al., 2013).

Thesis Structure

Extensive forthright installments extricated from the private accomplices towards the legislature may have two primary effects on the evaluations of the administration's obligations. As on a fundamental level, a pervasive effect, which stems for the cash time esteem a dollar that has been gotten today is in all probability in excess of a dollar that would be gotten tomorrow-, would offer an update of the financial position of the legislature and the viewpoint of hazard. In any case, a need to relate the choices relating to ventures made today with the long haul maintainability of transportation in the general population part (Delmon, 2017).

Should such a relation fail to be achieved, then such an arrangement is most likely to have negative effects on the assessment of risk. An example is Fitch Ratings which has considered choosing on high-up-front payment to be a risk on the fiscal position of the government and as well to the project as it may the degree of flexibility of the government when it comes to meeting its future needs of transportation (Chung & Hensher, 2015).

Nonetheless, Fitch has assessed the possible arrangements that produced the large up-front payments should proceed to be invested in a manner that can be compared with the long-term assets which offer lasting economic benefits. On the contrary, it will perceive in the negative way the utilization of the proceeds meant for the short-term operating needs of the government (Verweij, 2015). The financial dimensions of the project may be influenced by the credit ratings of which have been allocated to the government debt as well as to the project under circumstances of refinancing and thus impacting on the general risk of the project (Demirag, 2017).

This is a risk that is related to the market prices of the future of an asset and is often categorical to the leasing or concession contracts where the infrastructure assets are given back to the government after a long time of operation by the private sector.  As per the justification by fittings, toll road projects are unfamiliar owing to the growth of their economic value with time hence allowing an increase in the stability of the credit for as long as they have been in operation (Effah Ameyaw & Chan, 2013).

Along these lines, as time passes by, acknowledge solidness is too being found in the weaker undertakings including those that have been blamed previously. Leftover esteem hazard is related with the idea of the installment for the concession that has been examined above (Wang, 2015). Installment the concession charges in a continuous way, as opposed to making the installments in a forthright single amount may prompt a greater amount of an expansion in the estimation of a developing venture (Effah Ameyaw & Chan, 2013).

Literature Review

This hazard results from the assessment of the bidder of alternate dangers that are related with the venture. There are two gatherings of offering dangers that are separated: astute conduct and victor's revile (Torchia, Calabrò & Morner, 2015). Usually difficult to build up the refinement in genuine practice as it could prompt generally as a mix of the two rusks. Regardless, in hypothetical practice, the basic factors behind such unsafe circumstances are frequently extraordinary and the hazard is also prone to be borne by different gatherings (Engel, Fischer & Galetovic, 2013). In this manner, chance originating from the champ's revile much of the time must be borne by the private area which is the bidder for the situation where there have not been consequent arrangements. The astute conduct chance, then again, has been activated by the private segment could host to be taken care of by the two gatherings despite the fact that it is much of the time borne by the administration (Tsamboulas, Verma & Moraiti, 2013).

The danger of pioneering conduct has shaped a principal part of the Williamson's investigate of the bartering impacts of Demsetz. Demsetz reasons that an ex-stake focused closeout for the privilege to run an imposing business model under an establishment may prompt a comparative outcome as a standard rivalry in a market. The methodology through which such a result may happen is the welcome of offers at the unit cost for the items under syndication and after that having the most minimal offered get the honor (Gatti, 2013). Should organizations take part in an aggressive conduct, the champ would end up being the best and productive organization which makes offers at its normal expense and consequently procuring no imposing business model lease practically speaking?

The test on sharp conduct was attacked by Williamson completely on contract deficiency and additionally the many-sided quality of an organization (Tikhomirov et al., 2016). He proposed that a compressive investigation of the diversifying (concession) structure features the difficulties by and by because of vulnerability for the future, expenses of exchanges and additionally deviated data that are accessible between the gatherings in the agreement:

• In as much as these dangers may happen in any affiliation that includes a focused offering, higher occurrences are probably going to be felt openly private association ventures gave (Greve and Hodge, 2013)
• The venture frequently incorporates a complex hazard sharing and institutional course of action, which according to Williamson's scrutinize would make it less demanding to start event of different dangers by the private accomplice in asking for a transaction (Siemiatycki, 2015).
• The resources proprietorship is still with the legislature and thus the enthusiasm for the venture is still with it or bears on the most reduced end a lingering hazard, in opposition to the privatization of the advantage (Gurgun and Touran, 2013).

The association of the private accomplice in the task is regularly more and the general population private organization outline includes a greater stake in contrast with the customary financing.

This is a risk that often comes up in a competitive bidding especially in cases where a private firm provides a much better offer in comparison with any other competitor, following its evaluation of the project (Sarmento & Renneboog, 2016). It may be due to lack of enough experience of the bidder, high confidence in the potential of the project or even poor risk management. Therefore the winner may finally end up being paid more than the worth of the projector in any case higher than if he had made bids more conservatively (Huxham & Vangen, 2013). The winner’s curse is perceived to be more dangerous in cases of:

• A new project which is characterized by high levels of uncertainty
• Numerous bidders
• A new venture or no source of a competitive advantage

It is recommended that bidders who are not having any competitive advantage do more bids conservatively especially in cases where they would expect numerous other bidders.

This is a hazard that regularly comes up in a focused offering particularly in situations where a private firm gives a greatly improved offer in correlation with some other contender, following its assessment of the undertaking (Sarmento and Renneboog, 2016). It might be because of absence of enough experience of the bidder, high trust in the capability of the task or even poor hazard administration. Along these lines the champ may at long last wind up being paid more than the value of the projector regardless higher than if he had made offers all the more moderately (Huxham and Vangen, 2013). The victor's revile is seen to be more unsafe in instances of:

• A new undertaking which is described by abnormal amounts of vulnerability
• Numerous bidders
• A new pursuit or no wellspring of an upper hand

It is suggested that bidders who are not having any upper hand accomplish more offers moderately particularly in situations where they would expect various different bidders. (Hwang, Zhao & Gay, 2013).

This risk arises from the question as to whether the project would be able to proceed to its full length as stipulated to be its terms owing to the possible changes in the preferences of the citizens or chances of the services becoming outdated (Roehrich, Lewis & George, 2014). An example of such could be a recreational facility that could be faced with the challenge of a smaller use as a result of the development of new types of sports, recreation, and entertainment. The result may be a shutdown in the earlier public-private partnership projects, contrary to the longer contract term. Under such circumstances, the government may incur additional cost so as to compensate the private party (Iossa & Martimort, 2015).

This encompasses a change in the value of the domestic currency in comparison with the major currencies of the world, for example, the U.S. dollar or euro (Plummer, 2013). Such a risk comes into existence when the public-private partnership project parties may need to purchase some materials, services or equipment from other countries during the term of the project.

Since the materials and services were planned in a national currency, there could be a change in the value of the national currency at the time of making purchases hence prompting the buyer to pay more for such equipment and materials should there be depreciation in the value of the national currency (Ismail & Azzahra, 2014). This would translate to high costs of public-private partnership projects.

In some other cases, the buyers may be forced to pay less should there be an appreciation in the value of the national currency which would translate to saving of costs for the public-private partnership project. More of the than not, this type of risk is more relevant to the transitional countries among them Kazakhstan and Russia since their economies and currencies are often very unstable as compared with those of the industrialized countries (Ismail, 2013).

Despite the widely recognized and known benefits that come with Private Public Partnership, global experiences have illustrated that there can be server issues affecting the successful implementation of such partnerships which may in one way or another derail or even completely paralyze their success (Osei-Kyei & Chan, 2015). It has been suggested that an elaborately structured Private Public Partnership is able to efficiency attain better results as opposed to the initiatives of the public sector. Claims are often made that the private sector, owing to its elaborate technical, managerial and commercial skills, is able to carry out some tasks in a more efficient manner that the government hence providing enormous benefits to the public.  

Despite the avowed benefits, recent global experiences of Private Public Partnership programs have illustrated that there are numerous risks of different levels which need to effectively manage in order to reap from the partnership (Nisar, 2013). While most of these risks seem not be given the attention they deserve, their impacts on the success of the Private Public Partnership projects go hand in hand with the success of such a project. This paper thus seeks to address the various ways in which the different types and levels of risks can be managed in Private Public Partnership projects, using a China-based project as a case study to aid in offering in-depth explorations. The paper intends to offer contributions to the risk management discussion regarding Private Public Partnership with a narrowing down into the China context (Ng, Wong & Wong, 2013).  

This chapter explains the research methodology that was used to undertake your research.  It explains how you collected your data, the reason for the choice of the method, how the data was analyzed.

The research method used for this research was case studies and the use of secondary sources of data through the conduction of literature on the chosen topic. Case studies of PPP projects in China were used as they offered an opportunity of more realistic and solid learning and understanding of the working of PPP projects in the contemporary society (Tang, et al, 2010, p. 689). The various risks that are encountered in PPP projects in China were documented and the adopted risk management strategies discussed at length which formed the basis of recommendations for future work. The literature review provided insights into the existing knowledge in the literature regarding risk management in PPP projects hence were used as the basis of establishing the knowledge gap that called for the research (Akintoye et al, 2008, p. 17).

Data collection was done through the selection of the most relevant literature on risk management in PPP projects (Tang et al, 2010, p. 690). The pieces of literature were extracted from peer-reviewed sources such as Google Scholar to ensure the validity and accuracy of the data collected. The case studies involving conducting visits to some of the projects classified as PPP projects in China with the aim of understanding the various risks that such projects experience and the risk management strategies as outlined by the management of such projects (Perry, and Hayes, 1985 p. 500). More insights were gained through interviews with the various stakeholders of the different projects.

The data was analyzed by making a comparison between the various works of literature as explored by the different authors. Their suggestions and recommendations are used as the basis for coming up with the conclusion on the different types of risks and the management strategies. Comparison between the different suggestions by various authors offers the basis of establishing the thoughts by a majority of the authors which played a role in establishing grounds for justification and validity (Edwards and Bowen, 1998, p. 340).

Knowledge management refers to an activity through which knowledge in a firm may be identified, integrated, controlled and exerted so as to explore and establish new knowledge

Explicit understanding and tacit understanding: Tacit knowledge is pegged on the background of an individual and thus not easy to communicate or share while explicit knowledge tends to be more objective and easy to preserve as well as share (Wang and Yuan, 2011, p. 2011).

The SECI model: This is used in the illustration of the interchange between explicit knowledge and tactic knowledge and basically results in the recreation of new knowledge. The SECI model has four main parts: Socialization, Externalization, Combination, and Internalization (SECI). Socialization defines the stage on the transfer of knowledge to tacit from another tacit and often takes place in face to face teaching or training (Loosemore & Cheung, 2015).

Externalization defines the process of transmission knowledge to explicit from tacit and can be achieved through writing a book which offers a personal experience (Warner, 2013)

The combination is the integration of knowledge into a system, for example, AutoCAD, SketchUp, and Revit through the transformation of the knowledge from explicit to explicit.

Internalization defines the process of gaining tacit knowledge by an individual through the use of explicit knowledge (Ameyaw & Chan, 2015). This is usually purported as learning by doing.

A PPP project has two primary knowledge gaps; lack of ways of getting knowledge and the variations of various types of knowledge from both the private and the public sectors (Liu & Wilkinson, 2014).

Through the use of knowledge management, more specifically the SECI-model, better communication can be achieved among stakeholders. Setting up a PPP knowledge base through collecting the knowledge and information from the available stuff is such a wonderful thing that would aid ease of supervision by the public sector and an understanding of the achievements and performance that are attained by the private sector (Ameyaw & Chan, 2015). Besides, information regarding a project should be collected in a PPP knowledge base to enable persons from the two sectors to have a proper awareness of the tasks that are on-going. Two main approaches are usable in the spread of an idea from the PPP knowledge base: hard copy and soft copy Liu, Love, Davis, Smith & Regan, 2014). The enrichment of the whole knowledge base can be achieved through a transformation of the tacit and explicit knowledge (Babatunde et al., 2015).

Owing to the fact that risk management is an expanding domain that brings together risk management and knowledge management and going by the fact that there do not exist any works of literature on this new area regarding PPP project, it forms the bulk of discussion in the discussion chapter (Lipper et al., 2014).

Risk management is defined is a game plan kind involving the discovery, analysis, estimation, moderation, and monitoring of the risks that are involved with a project in a bid to formulate actions aimed at managing and handling them effectively (Barlow, Roehrich & Wright, 2013).

There are adverse types of risk among them

• Risks resulting from politics
• Risks resulting from finances
• Risks due to operations
• Risks resulting from construction
• Legal and contractual risks (Kunreuther, 2015)
• Risks resulting from the geological structure of the geological composition
• Risks to the environment
• Security risks among other risk types

Risks in PPP projects should be borne by both the private and public sectors (Khmel & Zhao, 2016). At the initial stages in which a contract is signed between the public sector and the concessionaire, it should be noted that there should be identification and allocation of risks in each phase, should there be unbalanced duties and contention in the final phases (Busch & Givens, 2013). Nonetheless, in as much as the possible risks are identified in the initial contract agreement, chances of some unexpected or otherwise unknown risks may take place, a case that is true in case of sudden alterations that are closely associated with the project for example legal changes or changes in the relationship between the sectors involved in the agreement.

From the perception of Kloosterman (2016), there is a 5-step process that has provided ideal for carrying out risks management. The steps include risk identification, assessment, ranking, control, and tracing.

Risk identification: This is the initial and foremost step and involves the identification and assortment of some of the risk which may have effects on a PPP project (Ke, Wang & Chan, 2013). The first step of this process involves the identification of the most common risks in the whole life cycle of the PPP project through coming up with a literature review. This will be carried out in the early stages of the PP project for obvious reasons that only upon identification of the risk will the stakeholders be able to take the necessary actions towards mitigating the risk (Wojewnik-Filipkowska & Trojanowski, 2013).

Risk analysis and assessment: The risks and analyzed and of them, an assessment is made before they can be ranked. This makes up the second phase of any merit risk management via which the arguments for the provided risks need to be taken into consideration as well as the possible aftermath should the risks become a reality (Cabral & Silva, 2013).

Risk evaluation and assessment: Upon establishing the possible impacts of failure to manage risks, an evaluation and ranking of the risks are done as the third step of the 5-step process.  

Risk treatment: This is a duo divided phase encompassing risk allocation strategy and risk mitigation

Risk mitigation tends to be one of the core portions in PPP projects and is composed of four main parts: risks to be negotiated, the risk to be shared, risks to be allocated to the private sector and risks to be allocated to be public sector (Yang, Hou & Wang, 2013).

According to Ke et al., 2010, demand risk, environmental pollution risk, inflation risk, interest rate risk, political disagreement risk should be shared between the partners while the risks of acquiring land and compensations, risks associated with not getting the project and risk of changes in legislation should be  borne by the public sector (Joseph, 2013). The private sector, on the other hand, should bear such risks is project quality risk, revenue risk, contract default risk, time delay risk, budget overspent risk, high financial costs risks and risks of low residual value (Carbonara, Costantino & Pellegrino, 2014). Among the risks that need to be shared by the sectors include environmental pollution risk, risks of demand, inflation risk, risks of changes in the exchange rate, interest rate changes risk as well as political disagreement risk.

Lam et al., (2007) on the other hand suggests that risks of inflation changes, changes in law, risks of interest rate changes, risks of bad weather, site risk, risk of low residual value and risk of force majeure need to be shared between the public and private sectors while such risks as risk of third party approval, contractual risk and government instability risk are to be allocated to the public sector even as risks of changes in design, quality risks, risks of subcontractor default, material risk and risk of overspent operation cost and construction beside risk of high financial costs are to be distributed to the private sector (Carbonara, Costantino & Pellegrino, 2014).

Li et al., (2005) proposes that the environmental risk, risk of changes in the interest rates, risks of demand, risks of high financial costs, risk of inflation, risks of very late changes in the design, risk of low residual value, risk of supplier default should be distributed to the private sector even as the public sector is left with such risks as legislation change risk, political disagreement risk, land acquisition, and compensation risk should be undertaken by the public sector. Risks of force majeure and risks of changes in the legislation are best shared by both the private and the public sectors (Jomo, Chowdhury, Sharma & Platz, 2016).

Carbonara et al. (2015) propose that the medication should be provided to the private company to take care of the risk of failing to acquire the project. There are about 5 suggestions of mitigation strategies that can be used in handling land acquisition and compensation risk: setting up a flexible schedule, setting aside sufficient capital for accidents, including any imaginable terms of acquisition and compensation at the early stages, including the articles of termination as part of the contract so as to manage political disagreements (Chen et al., 2013).

The public sector should commit to the private sector a rational interval of fluctuation in the interest rates and assure compensation should it go beyond the interval so as to keep the risk of changes in the interest rates in check (Ismail, 2013). The responsibility of reimbursement of the external obligation extracted from the unusual changes in the exchange rates should be taken by the government so as to keep in change the exchange rates change risk.

The government should offer a promise of compensation in a bid to mitigate the risk of changes in the legislation (Chou & Pramudawardhani, 2015). A definition of the responsibility of allocation of different design blemishes before time in a contract agreement would aid in the tackling of the risks of design defect while the risk of time delay may be mitigated by the construction company providing an assurance of completing the construction within the provided time frame without which an amercement would be demanded from the construction company (Yang, Hou & Wang, 2013).

The risks of the poor quality of the project may be handled by asking for margin money from the contractor or the construction company. Risk of force majeure can be curbed through the private company requesting for an insurance cover from the government while the risk of supplier or contract default may be handled through the set of duties by the concessionaire for them. An estimation of the cost of operation should be done prior to the schedule to avoid the risk of operating costs overspend while receipt risk can be avoided if the government prescribes a payoff interval (Chung & Hensher, 2015).

Mitigation of the risk of done can be achieved through the government assuring the assumption of the debt left upon the completion of a project. Pre-investment risk mitigation can be achieved through an elaborate analysis of the market before bidding can be made while poor service quality risk can be avoided by the offering of performance bonus (Ismail & Azzahra, 2014).

In addition to the risks that are often found in the PPP projects worldwide, there are some risks that feature in Chinese PPP projects as discussed. One of such is a corruption of bribery risk which has remained to be an outstanding administrative problem that China is experiencing (Chung & Hensher, 2015). This could be attributed to the fact that some of the government placement may demand rewards or even rebates, of which such behaviors are illegal. Another risk in Chinese PPP projects is a risk of meddling local government due to the fact that at times the government engages in interventions of installations or services that are to be offered by the private companies in a manner that is irrational (Chung & Hensher, 2015). The third risk in this category is the risk of trustworthiness and dependability of the local government. The national government of the country is argued to be having very high chances of going against the agreements of the contract especially after it has been signed.

The mentioned risks that are specific to Chinese PPP projects can best be deliberated upon by assigning them primarily to the public sector that will take responsibility should they occur. It can be established and noticed from the risks that they are all as a result of the conduct of the local government or otherwise the holders of their offices. Other authors, on the other hand, offer a suggestion that only the risk of dependability and trustworthiness should be left as a responsibility of the public sector (Cooper et al., 2014). When it comes to mitigation strategies of the risk, a suggestion is offered that the private sector is offered supervisory roles over the behavior of the public sector and enhances the relationship with the public sector while at the same time caution being given to the public sector to behave itself.

Upon the completion of the literature review, a conclusion can be made that for PPP projects there exists an avalanche of researches related with risk identification, risk allocation as well as risk mitigation, however, limited research has been conducted on risk ranking and assessment (Iossa & Martimort, 2015). Still, it could be a problem either in coming across effective investigations which are related to the limitations to risks or explore elaborate research of linking knowledge management with risk management in PPP projects (Cooper et al., 2014).

As it is obvious that BIM could be adopted on risk management, further investigation into the same is done in this change. Since works of literature associated with the knowledge management of PPP projects are relatively few, not forgetting to say that there are no works of literature on knowledge management that are specific to PPP.

With regard to risk identification, some of the risks among them interest rate changes risks, environmental pollution risk, as well as risks of inflation, are not only found in a single phase of the entire life cycle of a PPP project (Cruz & Marques, 2013). This can be attributed to the writings and works of the various works of literature which outline those risks should be well taken care of just in a single phase. The reports identify and discuss a number of risks aligned to PP projects. The number of the risks may be declared to be more, enough or less when a comparison is made against the specific project in question (Hwang, Zhao & Gay, 2013). Each project is often accompanied by a background in numerous aspects which include economic, political and social. There are no predefined rules in any project which instructs on the risks that the project should be involved in and thus the risks discussed in this report are either easily or probably incurred in PPP projects but not definitely (Huxham & Vangen, 2013).

Design Errors	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	LOW	MODERATE	LOW	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	MODERATE
Lack of Proper Communication	LOW	MODERATE	MEDIUM	MODERATE	MODERATE	LOW	MODERATE	MEDIUM
Unproven Engineering techniques	VERY HIGH	HIGH	HIGH	HIGH	VERY HIGH	VERY HIGH	MEDIUM	MEDIUM
Lack of government support	LOW	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	LOW	MEDIUM	LOW	MEDIUM	MEDIUM
Operation cost and time overruns	LOW	LOW	MEDIUM	MODERATE	MODERATE	HIGH	MODERATE	HIGH
Market demand change	MODERATE	MEDIUM	LOW	MEDIUM	MODERATE	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	MEDIUM
Financial Risk	HIGH	MEDIUM	HIGH	HIGH	MEDIUM	HIGH	VERY HIGH	HIGH
Residual Risk	MEDIUM	LOW	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	MODERATE	LOW	LOW	LOW
Sponsor Risk	LOW	MEDIUM	HIGH	LOW	MODERATE	MEDIUM	LOW	MEDIUM
Opportunistic Renegotiation Risk	MEDIUM	MODERATE	HIGH	MEDIUM	MODERATE	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	MODERATE
Sustainability Risk	MODERATE	MEDIUM	LOW	LOW	MODERATE	MEDIUM	MODERATE	MODERATE
Public Acceptance Risk	HIGH	HIGH	MEDIUM	HIGH	HIGH	MEDIUM	MEDIUM	HIGH

Table 2: Risk Identification and Risk Criteria by Bing (2005)

A few observations can be made when it comes to risk allocation. One of such observations is made in Table 1 that eliminates the chances of conflicts in the allocation of some risks yet there are numerous variances in certain other allocations of risks. For this reason, a few explanations can be made of Table 1 (De Schepper, Dooms & Haezendonck, 2014). One of such is that all literature is pegged on various projects or researches and hence an impossibility of forcing the various authors to concentrate on the same risks as well as strategies of risk allocation. Another explanation is that chances are that the researchers could be from a varied background as they do not come from the same geographic locations and thus the differences in the suggested allocations (De Vries & Yehoue, 2013). A conclusion on this can thus be made that it comes up with a conclusion on how to allocate a majority of the risks is a bit of a challenge.

In as much as numerous risks may not be allocated with certainty, there exist some that have exceptions for example risk on project quality, risk on time delay, budget overspent risk as well as risks of overspends on operating costs all of which are risks that mainly rely on the efficiency of work of the private sector (DeCorla-Souza et al., 2013). This leaves the private sector with no option but to take care of such types of risks and hence should any of such risks be incurred, the private sector is compelled to comply and make the required compensation. With consideration to risk allocation, it is certain that risk should ever be distributed to a sector which is in a position to effectively manage it in a manner treated to be most proper and most cost-effective (Delmon, 2017).

A lot of the mitigation strategies can be found in works of literature which are different from those works of literature that introduce risk allocation. This is attributed to the fact that a significant number of the references give focus just to a single aspect.

Following the three risks identified in the case study conducted on the Chinese PPP projects, it is not to conclude that these risks cannot be found in other countries. The point here is that these risks may be more prone in the Chinese projects or even severer as compared to the other countries (Chung & Hensher, 2015).

BIM (Building Information Modelling) is considered one of the most important and strongest tools for risk management. This makes it usable in PPP projects. Through the involvement of BIM in a contract, such values as better completion, better cooperation as well as better work efficiency are attained (Demirag, 2017). Furthermore, BIM can be integrated into the risk allocation of PPP projects since the substance of BIM has the capability to outlines and demands the allocation of different risks in a specific way. This offer an opportunity of distribution of every thinkable risk to a particular sector at the early stage hence avoiding situations of arises of risk where the responsibilities are not clear. This thus leads to the need for a clear specification of risk in a contract with the aid of BIM. One of such examples is the risks of design defect where the details of the information on the design of a project are supposed to be included in a contact through the use of BIM (Effah Ameyaw & Chan, 2013).

Knowledge risk management involves the adoption of tools of knowledge management including the SECI model in the improvement of risk management. Knowledge management often handles two problem domains: environmental uncertainty and cognitive constraints. Knowledge risk management is carried out to bring to the awareness of the decision makers the possible risks and thereby enact the measures early enough to mitigate risks (Engel, Fischer & Galetovic, 2013). A number of steps are needed in the process of implementation of PPP projects as shown in figure

Figure: Steps in PPP Project Implementation Process

Through the creation and sharing of knowledge, sustainability of healthy relationships and cooperation between the two sectors is achieved enabling the settling of some of the risks as well as a more efficient way of designing the project (Gurgun & Touran, 2013).

Exploitation of knowledge risk management may add significant value to the mitigation of risks when it comes to risk management through the use of risk management tools. Some of the risk management tools include the SECI model, knowledge mapping, the knowledge base as well as communities of practice (Gatti, 2013). The report mainly delved into the SECI model which makes use of four various methods for the creation of new knowledge. These four knowledge creation ways are able to handle two knowledge gaps: contention of the various types of knowledge regarding the private sector and public sector and unavailability of ways of getting knowledge. Such knowledge gaps are able to lead to a great deal of risk during a PPP project and hence the need to cope with them. Timely acquisition of the accurate information by both sectors significantly contributed to the avoidance of such risks as the risk of design, the risk of time, the risk of late changes in the design, risks of overrun in operating costs among others (Greve & Hodge, 2013)

Conclusion

The adoption of knowledge management in PPP projects can aid in the achievement of healthier relationships as well as communication between the various partners involved in a PPP project. Among the most important procedures in the process of risks management in any PPP project are risk identification, risk allocation as well as risk mitigation. Numerous risks have been identified in the initial stage.

There four main parts of the strategies of risk allocation: distribution of risks to the personal sector, distribution of risks to the joint sector, negotiation of risks together as well as distribution of risks jointly by the two sectors. Important to note when it comes to the allocation of risk is that it ought to be done to the partner that has the managerial capability it in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. When it comes to risk mitigation strategy, some of the probable solutions have been discussed at length in the preceding chapters.  

There were numerous limitations when it came to coming up with this thesis report including:

Lack of possibility of meditating upon all the situations and possibilities owing to the limitation of the visions and knowledge of authors

Time constraints owing to the limited time for doing the research and thus a limited scope of research

The possibility of examining each of the specific countries that have adopted PP model in the report was almost non-existing

Inability to exploit all the potential risks since every literature is composed of various risks and the selected ones were mainly those that are mentioned mostly

The strategies of risk mitigation provided are out of question to take into consideration all the scenarios and offer all the probable solutions

Through the works of literature that have been carried out, it is confirmed that there are minimal researches that have been conducted on risk ranking and assessment especially of PPP projects. It thus a recommendation that more studies are done on this are to enhance investigations.

Still, further studies may attach more concentration on the association between the challenges of PPP models and the risks associated with PPP models

As there are very few references on the stakeholder management aspect of PPP project, some more research should as well concentrate on this area including the link between risk management and stakeholder management of PPP projects.

Still, a research aimed at exploitation of BIM and its adoption in the risk management of PPP projects would attract significant interest.

References

Akintoye, A., Beck, M. and Hardcastle, C. eds., 2008. Public-private partnerships: managing risks and opportunities. John Wiley & Sons

Ameyaw, E.E. and Chan, A.P., 2015. Evaluation and ranking of risk factors in public-private partnership water supply projects in developing countries using a fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(12), pp.5102-5116

Ameyaw, E.E. and Chan, A.P., 2015. Risk allocation in public-private partnership water supply projects in Ghana. Construction Management and Economics, 33(3), pp.187-208

Babatunde, S.O., Perera, S., Zhou, L. and Udeaja, C., 2015. Barriers to public-private partnership projects in developing countries: A case of Nigeria. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 22(6), pp.669-691

Barlow, J., Roehrich, J. and Wright, S., 2013. Europe sees mixed results from public-private partnerships for building and managing health care facilities and services. Health Affairs, 32(1), pp.146-154

Busch, N.E. and Givens, A.D., 2013. Achieving resilience in disaster management: the role of public-private partnerships. Journal of strategic security, 6(2), p.1

Cabral, S. and Silva Jr, A.F., 2013. An approach for evaluating the risk management role of governments in public-private partnerships for mega-event stadiums. European Sports Management Quarterly, 13(4), pp.472-490

Carbonara, N., Costantino, N. and Pellegrino, R., 2014. Concession period for PPPs: A win-win model for a fair risk sharing. International Journal of Project Management, 32(7), pp.1223-1232

Carbonara, N., Costantino, N. and Pellegrino, R., 2014. Revenue guarantee in public-private partnerships: a fair risk allocation model. Construction management and economics, 32(4), pp.403-415

Chen, J., Chen, T.H.Y., Vertinsky, I., Yumagulova, L., and Park, C., 2013. Public-private partnerships for the development of disaster resilient communities. Journal of contingencies and crisis management, 21(3), pp.130-143

Cheung, E., 2009. Developing a best practice framework for implementing public-private partnerships (PPP) in Hong Kong (Doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology)

Chou, J.S. and Pramudawardhani, D., 2015. Cross-country comparisons of key drivers, critical success factors and risk allocation for public-private partnership projects. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), pp.1136-1150

Chung, D., and Hensher, D., 2015. Risk management in public-private partnerships. Australian Accounting Review, 25(1), pp.13-27

Chung, D., and Hensher, D., 2015. Risk management in public-private partnerships. Australian Accounting Review, 25(1), pp.13-27

Cooper, D., Bosnich, P., Grey, S., Purdy, G., Raymond, G., Walker, P. and Wood, M., 2014. Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk with ISO 31000 and IEC 62198. Wiley Global Education

Cruz, C.O. and Marques, R.C., 2013. Flexible contracts to cope with uncertainty in public-private partnerships. International Journal of Project Management, 31(3), pp.473-483

De Schepper, S., Dooms, M. and Haezendonck, E., 2014. Stakeholder dynamics and responsibilities in Public-Private Partnerships: A mixed experience. International Journal of Project Management, 32(7), pp.1210-1222

De Vries, P. and Yehoue, E.B. eds., 2013. The Routledge companion to public-private partnerships. Routledge

DeCarlo-Souza, P., Lee, D., Timothy, D. and Mayer, J., 2013. Comparing public-private partnerships with conventional procurement: incorporating considerations from the benefit-cost analysis. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2346), pp.32-39

Delmon, J., 2017. Public-private partnership projects in infrastructure: an essential guide for policymakers. Cambridge University Press

Demirag, I., 2017. A framework for examining accountability and value for money in the UK’s private finance initiative. In Corporate Social Responsibility, Accountability and Governance (pp. 77-92). Routledge

Edwards, P.J. and Bowen, P.A., 1998. Risk and risk management in construction: a review and future directions for research. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 5(4), pp.339-349

Effah Ameyaw, E. and Chan, A.P., 2013. Identifying public-private partnership (PPP) risks in managing water supply projects in Ghana. Journal of Facilities Management, 11(2), pp.152-182

Engel, E., Fischer, R. and Galetovic, A., 2013. The basic public finance of public-private partnerships. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(1), pp.83-111

Gatti, S., 2013. Project finance in theory and practice: designing, structuring, and financing private and public projects. Academic Press

Greve, C. and Hodge, G. eds., 2013. Rethinking public-private partnerships: Strategies for turbulent times. Routledge

Grimsey, D. and Lewis, M.K., 2002. Evaluating the risks of public-private partnerships for infrastructure projects. International journal of project management, 20(2), pp.107-118

Gurgun, A.P., and Touran, A., 2013. Public-private partnership experience in the international arena: Case of Turkey. Journal of Management in Engineering, 30(6), p.04014029

Haufler, V., 2013. A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Carnegie Endowment

Hodge, G.A., 2004. The risky business of public-private partnerships. Australian Journal of public administration, 63(4), pp.37-49

Huxham, C. and Vangen, S., 2013. Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. Routledge

Hwang, B.G., Zhao, X. and Gay, M.J.S., 2013. Public-private partnership projects in Singapore: Factors, critical risks and preferred risk allocation from the perspective of contractors. International Journal of Project Management, 31(3), pp.424-433

Iossa, E. and Martimort, D., 2015. The simple microeconomics of public?private partnerships. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 17(1), pp.4-48

Ismail, S. and Azzahra Haris, F., 2014. Constraints in implementing public-private partnership (PPP) in Malaysia. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 4(3), pp.238-250

Ismail, S., 2013. Critical success factors of public-private partnership (PPP) implementation in Malaysia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 5(1), pp.6-19

Jomo, K.S., Chowdhury, A., Sharma, K. and Platz, D., 2016. Public-private partnerships and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: fit for purpose?. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Joseph, J., 2013. Resilience as embedded neoliberalism: a governmentality approach. Resilience, 1(1), pp.38-52

Ke, Y., Wang, S. and Chan, A.P., 2013. Risk misallocation in public-private partnership projects in China. International Public Management Journal, 16(3), pp.438-460

Khmel, V. and Zhao, S., 2016. The arrangement of financing for highway infrastructure projects under the conditions of Public–Private Partnership. IATSS Research, 39(2), pp.138-145

Kunreuther, H., 2015. The role of insurance in reducing losses from extreme events: The need for public-private partnerships. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance-Issues and Practice, 40(4), pp.741-762

 Lee, J.N., 2001. The impact of knowledge sharing, organizational capability and partnership quality on IS outsourcing success. Information & Management, 38(5), pp.323-335

Lewis, M.K., 2001. Risk management in public-private partnerships (No. 12). CeGE Discussion Paper. Nunamaker Jr, J.F., Chen, M. and Purdin, T.D., 1990. Systems development in information systems research. Journal of management information systems, 7(3), pp.89-106

Lipper, L., Thornton, P., Campbell, B.M., Baedeker, T., Braimoh, A., Bwalya, M., Caron, P., Cattaneo, A., Garrity, D., Henry, K. and Hottle, R., 2014. Climate-smart agriculture for food security. Nature Climate Change, 4(12), p.1068

Liu, J., Love, P.E., Davis, P.R., Smith, J., and Regan, M., 2014. A conceptual framework for the performance measurement of public-private partnerships. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 21(1), p.04014023

Liu, J., Love, P.E., Smith, J., Regan, M., and Davis, P.R., 2014. Life cycle critical success factors for public-private partnership infrastructure projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 31(5), p.04014073

Liu, T. and Wilkinson, S., 2014. Large-scale public venue development and the application of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), pp.88-100

Loosemore, M. and Cheung, E., 2015. Implementing systems thinking to manage risk in public-private partnership projects. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), pp.1325-1334

Ng, S.T., Wong, J.M. and Wong, K.K., 2013. A public-private-people partnerships (P4) process framework for infrastructure development in Hong Kong. Cities, 31, pp.370-381

Nisar, T.M., 2013. Implementation constraints in social enterprise and community public-private partnerships. International Journal of Project Management, 31(4), pp.638-651

Osei-Kyei, R. and Chan, A.P., 2015. Review of studies on the Critical Success Factors for Public-Private Partnership (PPP) projects from 1990 to 2013. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), pp.1335-1346

Payne, G., 1998, April. Research on public/private partnerships. In an international conference on Housing at Havana, Cuba

Perry, J.G. and Hayes, R.W., 1985. Risk and its management in construction projects. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 78(3), pp.499-521

Plummer, J., 2013. Focusing partnerships: a sourcebook for municipal capacity building in public-private partnerships. Routledge

Robert, O.K., Dansoh, A., and Ofori–Kuragu, J.K., 2014. Reasons for adopting public-private partnership (PPP) for construction projects in Ghana. International Journal of Construction Management, 14(4), pp.227-238

Roehrich, J.K., Lewis, M.A. and George, G., 2014. Are public-private partnerships a healthy option? A systematic literature review. Social Science & Medicine, 113, pp.110-119

Roumboutsos, A. and Pantelias, A., 2015. Allocating revenue risk in transport infrastructure public-private partnership projects: how it matters. Transport Reviews, 35(2), pp.183-203

Sarmento, J.M. and Renneboog, L., 2016. Anatomy of public-private partnerships: their creation, financing, and renegotiations. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(1), pp.94-122

Sharma, M. and Bindal, A., 2014. Public-Private Partnership. International Journal of Research (IJR), 1(7), pp.1270-1274

Siemiatycki, M., 2015. Public?Private Partnerships in C Canada: Reflections on twenty years of practice. Canadian Public Administration, 58(3), pp.343-362

Smyth, H. and Edkins, A., 2007. Relationship management in the management of PFI/PPP projects in the UK. International Journal of Project Management, 25(3), pp.232-240

Tang, L., Shen, Q. and Cheng, E.W., 2010. A review of studies on public-private partnership projects in the construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 28(7), pp.683-694

Tikhomirov, E.A., Bykovskiy, M.A., Veselova, N.Y., Mkrtumova, I.V., Malofeev, I.V., Ryazantsev, S.V. and Luk’yanets, A.S., 2016. Public-private partnership: The model of interaction of regional socio-economic systems in the trans-regional space. International review of management and marketing, 6(1S), pp.255-260

Torchia, M., Calabrò, A. and Morner, M., 2015. Public-private partnerships in the health care sector: A systematic review of the literature. Public Management Review, 17(2), pp.236-261

Tsamboulas, D., Verma, A. and Moraiti, P., 2013. Transport infrastructure provision and operations: Why should governments choose private-public partnership?. Research in Transportation Economics, 38(1), pp.122-127

Verweij, S., 2015. Once the shovel hits the ground: Evaluating the management of complex implementation processes of public-private partnership infrastructure projects with qualitative comparative analysis

Wang, J. and Yuan, H., 2011. Factors affecting contractors' risk attitudes in construction projects: a Case study from China. International Journal of Project Management, 29(2), pp.209-219

Wang, Y., 2015. Evolution of public-private partnership models in American toll road development: Learning based on public institutions' risk management. International Journal of Project Management, 33(3), pp.684-696

Waring, J., Currie, G. and Bishop, S., 2013. A contingent approach to the organization and management of public-private partnerships: An empirical study of English health care. Public Administration Review, 73(2), pp.313-326

Warner, M. and Sullivan, R. eds., 2017. Putting partnerships to work: Strategic alliances for development between government, the private sector, and civil society. Routledge

Warner, M.E., 2013. Private finance for public goods: social impact bonds. Journal of economic policy reform, 16(4), pp.303-319

Wojewnik-Filipkowska, A. and Trojanowski, D., 2013. Principles of public-private partnership financing–Polish experience. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 31(4), pp.329-344

Xu, Y., Yeung, J.F., Chan, A.P., Chan, D.W., Wang, S.Q. and Ke, Y., 2010. Developing a risk assessment model for PPP projects in China—A fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach. Automation in Construction, 19(7), pp.929-943

Yang, Y., Hou, Y. and Wang, Y., 2013. On the development of public-private partnerships in transitional economies: An explanatory framework. Public Administration Review, 73(2), pp.301-310