Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 16 results ...

Aalto, L, Sirola, P, Kalliomäki-Levanto, T, Lahtinen, M, Ruohomäki, V, Salonen, H and Reijula, K (2019) User-centric work environments in modular healthcare facilities. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1047–62.

Daniel, E I and Pasquire, C (2019) Creating social value within the delivery of construction projects: the role of lean approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1105–28.

Du, J, Wang, Q and Shi, Q (2019) Description–experience gap under imperfect information. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1151–70.

Edwards, P and Bowen, P (2019) Language and communication issues in HIV/AIDS intervention management in the South African construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 962–88.

Li, L, Li, Z, Li, X and Wu, G (2019) A review of global lean construction during the past two decades: analysis and visualization. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1192–216.

Lingard, H, Zhang, R P and Oswald, D (2019) Effect of leadership and communication practices on the safety climate and behaviour of construction workgroups. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 886–906.

Munir, M, Kiviniemi, A and Jones, S W (2019) Business value of integrated BIM-based asset management. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1171–91.

Seadon, J and Tookey, J E (2019) Drivers for construction productivity. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 945–61.

Shalaby, A and Hassanein, A (2019) A decision support system (DSS) for facilitating the scenario selection process of the renegotiation of PPP contracts. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1004–23.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Contract; Public private partnership (PPP); Management; Case study; Project management; Decision support systems; DSS; Spreadsheet; Renegotiation; Financial model; Re-equilibrium;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0969-9988
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-01-2018-0010
  • Abstract:
    Public private partnership contracts tend to have longer contract durations compared to other conventional procurement methods. A contract renegotiation becomes inevitable in most of the cases. The renegotiation process usually develops a number of scenarios in order to regain the contract equilibrium. The purpose of this paper is to facilitate the renegotiation process by offering an automated system to select the optimum renegotiation scenario that preserves the rights and the interests of the project stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach The common renegotiation scenarios used are: increasing the service charges, increasing the concession period or paying a lump sum amount to the party of concern in order to maintain a fixed rate of return and keep the return on equity constant. In this paper, a method of selecting the optimum scenario among the different scenarios is proposed. This is done using a weighted sum model to calculate the weights and ranks of a number of factors influencing the stakeholders’ decisions. A DSS is developed with the aid of Microsoft Excel, VBA programming language, and the Precision Tree 5.5 for Excel add-in. Findings The renegotiation process has been facilitated by using an automated system that maximizes the benefits of both the public sector and the private sector. The optimum renegotiation scenario has been selected for the case of the model. Originality/value The developed framework is of great benefit to project stakeholders, including the private sector, the public sector and the users of the service. It saves time and money invested in lengthy negotiations, and it enforces transparency and mutual trust between the different parties by providing a tool that significantly minimizes conflicts during the renegotiation process and defines clear steps to be followed in order to reach an agreement that will maximize the benefits for both the private and the public sectors.

Shrestha, K, Shrestha, P P and Lidder, M (2019) Life-cycle cost comparison of chip seal and striping: in-house workers versus private contractors. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 927–44.

Shrestha, P P, Shrestha, K K and Zeleke, H B (2019) Probability of change orders and the effect on cost and schedule for new public school buildings. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1087–104.

Shurrab, J, Hussain, M and Khan, M (2019) Green and sustainable practices in the construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1063–86.

Wang, Q and Shi, Q (2019) The incentive mechanism of knowledge sharing in the industrial construction supply chain based on a supervisory mechanism. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 989–1003.

Yalcinkaya, M and Singh, V (2019) Exploring the use of Gestalt’s principles in improving the visualization, user experience and comprehension of COBie data extension. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1024–46.

Zhu, F, Sun, M, Wang, L, Sun, X and Yu, M (2019) Value conflicts between local government and private sector in stock public-private partnership projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 907–26.

Zohrehvandi, S and Khalilzadeh, M (2019) APRT-FMEA buffer sizing method in scheduling of a wind farm construction project. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(06), 1129–50.