Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 10 results ...

Abudayyeh, O, Russell, J, Johnston, D and Rowings, J (2000) Construction Engineering and Management Undergraduate Education. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 169–75.

Alhazmi, T and McCaffer, R (2000) Project Procurement System Selection Model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 176–84.

Elazouni, A M and Metwally, F G (2000) D-SUB: Decision Support System for Subcontracting Construction Works. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 191–200.

Fente, J, Schexnayder, C and Knutson, K (2000) Defining a Probability Distribution Function for Construction Simulation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 234–41.

Kannan, G and Vorster, M (2000) Development of an Experience Database for Truck Loading Operations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 201–9.

Lu, M and AbouRizk, S M (2000) Simplified CPM/PERT Simulation Model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 219–26.

Seo, J, Haas, C T, Saidi, K and Sreenivasan, S V (2000) Graphical Control Interface for Construction and Maintenance Equipment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 210–8.

Songer, A D, Diekmann, J, Hendrickson, W and Flushing, D (2000) Situational Reengineering: Case Study Analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 185–90.

Wang, S Q, Tiong, R L K, Ting, S K and Ashley, D (2000) Evaluation and Management of Political Risks in China's BOT Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 242–50.

Ye, S and Tiong, R L K (2000) NPV-at-Risk Method in Infrastructure Project Investment Evaluation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(03), 227–33.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords:
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0733-9364
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2000)126:3(227)
  • Abstract:
    Strategic capital investment decisions are crucial to a business firm. The decision to invest in privately financed infrastructure projects requires careful consideration, because they are exposed to high levels of financial, political, and market risks. The project appraisal methods should incorporate analysis of these risks. A number of capital-investment decision methods can take risks into account, but each of them focuses on different factors and has its limitations. Thus, a more vigorous method is needed. A systematic classification of existing evaluation methods shows that it is possible to develop a new method—the net-present-value-at-risk (NPV-at-risk) method—by combining the weighted average cost of capital and dual risk-return methods. The evaluation of two hypothetical power projects shows that the NPV-at-risk method can provide a better decision for risk evaluation of, and investment in, privately financed infrastructure projects.