IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v17y2024i8p354-d1455476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Structural Equation Model on Critical Risk and Success in Public–Private Partnership: Exploratory Study

Author

Listed:
  • Medya Fathi

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Manhattan College, Riverdale, GA 10471, USA)

Abstract

In construction, risk is inherent in each project, and success involves meeting defined objectives beyond budget and schedule. Factors vary for infrastructure projects, and their correlation with performance must be studied. In the case of public–private partnership (PPP) transportation, the level of complexity is higher due to more involved parties. Risks and success factors in PPP projects affect each other, which may lead to project failure. Recognizing the critical risk factors (CRFs) and critical success factors (CSFs) is indispensable to ensure the success of PPP infrastructure project implementation. However, the existing research on the PPP risk and success relationship has not gone into sufficient detail, and more support to address the existing gaps in the body of knowledge and literature is necessary. Therefore, in response to the missing area in the public–private partnership transportation industry, this paper analyzed the correlation between PPP risks and success factors. It identified, explored, and categorized various risk and success factors by combining a literature review, expert panel interviews, and a questionnaire survey among both the public and private sectors, a win–win principle. The data collected were analyzed using the structural equation modeling (SEM) approach and relative significance. Results show the relationship between risk and success factors, their influence on PPPs, and the most important factors, known as CRFs and CSFs, with high loading factors (LF > 0.5) and high relative importance (NMS > 0.5). The top five CRFs include “Contract quality (incomplete, conflicting)”, “Staff expertise and experience”, “Financial market risk”, “Conflicting objectives and expectations”, and “Inefficient feasibility study”. The top five CSFs were found as “Appropriate risk allocation and risk-sharing”, “Strong financial capacity and capability of the private sector”, “Government providing guarantees”, “Employment of professional advisors”, and “Realistic assessment of the cost and benefits”. This study advances the understanding of risk and success factors in PPPs and contributes to the theoretical foundations, which will benefit not only public management, policy consultants, and investors but also academics interested in studying PPP transportation projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Medya Fathi, 2024. "A Structural Equation Model on Critical Risk and Success in Public–Private Partnership: Exploratory Study," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:17:y:2024:i:8:p:354-:d:1455476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/17/8/354/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/17/8/354/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlos Oliveira Cruz & Joaquim Miranda Sarmento, 2021. "The Impact of COVID-19 on Highway Traffic and Management: The Case Study of an Operator Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, May.
    2. Richard Burke & Istemi Demirag, 2019. "Risk management by SPV partners in toll road public private partnerships," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 711-731, May.
    3. S. Ping Ho & Liang Liu, 2002. "An option pricing-based model for evaluating the financial viability of privatized infrastructure projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 143-156.
    4. Dirk Meissner, 2019. "Public-Private Partnership Models for Science, Technology, and Innovation Cooperation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(4), pages 1341-1361, December.
    5. Páez-Pérez, David & Sánchez-Silva, Mauricio, 2016. "A dynamic principal-agent framework for modeling the performance of infrastructure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(2), pages 576-594.
    6. Usman Ahmad & Hamid Waqas & Kashif Akram, 2021. "Relationship between project success and the success factors in public–private partnership projects: A structural equation model," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 1927468-192, January.
    7. Yan Wang & Yujie Wang & Xiuyu Wu & Jiwang Li, 2020. "Exploring the Risk Factors of Infrastructure PPP Projects for Sustainable Delivery: A Social Network Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-26, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chan Young Park & Wooyong Jung & Seung H. Han, 2020. "Risk Perception Gaps Between Construction Investors and Financial Investors of International Public–Private Partnership (PPP) Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Kim, Amy M. & Li, Huanan, 2020. "Incorporating the impacts of climate change in transportation infrastructure decision models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 271-287.
    3. Yu-Lin Huang & Chai-Chi Pi, 2009. "Valuation of multi-stage BOT projects involving dedicated asset investments: a sequential compound option approach," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(7), pages 653-666.
    4. Taeil Park & Byungil Kim & Hyoungkwan Kim, 2012. "Impact of Deterioration and Negotiation on Sewer System O&M Contracts from the Real Option Perspective," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(10), pages 2973-2989, August.
    5. Di Corato, Luca & Dosi, Cesare & Moretto, Michele, 2015. "Multidimensional auctions for long-term procurement contracts under the threat of early exit: the case of conservation auctions," Working Paper Series 2015:6, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    6. Charles Cheah & Jicai Liu, 2006. "Valuing governmental support in infrastructure projects as real options using Monte Carlo simulation," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 545-554.
    7. Ales S. Berk & Dejan Podhraski, 2018. "Superiority of Monte Carlo simulation in valuing real options within public–private partnerships," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(1), pages 1-28, February.
    8. Cai, Dong & Zhang, Guoxing & Lai, Kee-hung & Guo, Chunxiang & Su, Bin, 2024. "Government incentive contract design for carbon reduction innovation considering market value under asymmetric information," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    9. Cesare Dosi & Michele Moretto, 2015. "Procurement with Unenforceable Contract Time and the Law of Liquidated Damages," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 160-186.
    10. Fatima Anam & Mubin Sajjad & Masood Rehan, 2024. "Risk-based integrated performance assessment framework for public-private partnership infrastructure projects," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 251-274.
    11. João Augusto Ferreira Freire & Eduardo Gonçalves, 2022. "Cooperation in Innovative Efforts: a Systematic Literature Review," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 3364-3400, December.
    12. Yong Kyu Lew & Jeong‐Yang Park, 2021. "The evolution of N‐helix of the regional innovation system: Implications for sustainability," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 453-464, March.
    13. Bing Xia & Jindong Wu & Jiaqi Wang & Yitao Fang & Haodi Shen & Jingli Shen, 2021. "Sustainable Renewal Methods of Urban Public Parking Spaces under the Scenario of Shared Autonomous Vehicles (SAV): A Review and a Proposal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-21, March.
    14. Guoxian Cao & Chaoyang Guo & Hezhong Li, 2022. "Risk Analysis of Public–Private Partnership Waste-to-Energy Incineration Projects from the Perspective of Rural Revitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Goran Amović & Rado Maksimović & Sonja Bunčić, 2020. "Critical Success Factors for Sustainable Public-Private Partnership (PPP) in Transition Conditions: An Empirical Study in Bosnia and Herzegovina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-29, September.
    16. Lozano, Jorge-Mario & Zuluaga, Santiago & Sánchez-Silva, Mauricio, 2020. "Developing flexible management strategies in infrastructure: The sequential expansion problem for infrastructure analysis (SEPIA)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    17. Taeil Park & Changyoon Kim & Hyoungkwan Kim, 2014. "Valuation of Drainage Infrastructure Improvement Under Climate Change Using Real Options," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(2), pages 445-457, January.
    18. Roberto Moro-Visconti, 2021. "Networking Digital Platforms and Healthcare Project Finance Bankability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, April.
    19. Jun Zhang & Shenghao Zhao & Chaonan Peng & Xianming Gong, 2022. "Spatial Heterogeneity of the Recovery of Road Traffic Volume from the Impact of COVID-19: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Gennaro Strazzullo & William J. Ion & Jillian MacBryde, 2022. "An Investigation of the Translational Asset: A Proposed Classification," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 3123-3149, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:17:y:2024:i:8:p:354-:d:1455476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.