The demand hierarchy of the government and investors in PPP projects

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to determine the demand category and level of government and investors in public–private partnership (PPP) projects. It emphasizes the importance of meeting the demands of stakeholders and controlling the unreasonable demands. This study aims to improve the demand management of stakeholders in the PPP project and lay a foundation for the research on behavior based on the motivation theory.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper opted for a questionnaire survey to collect data based on indicators identified through literature. The participants come from the government and private sector (investors, contractors, operators, etc.) in China PPP Lecture Hall. The reliability, validity and variance analyses are used to test the reliability of data. Factor analysis and entropy method are used to determine demand categories and weights.

Findings

The government’s 14 demands are divided into four groups: satisfy public activities, self-interest, responsibility and relief financial pressure; 6 investor's demands are divided into development ability and satisfy social activities. The self-interest of government is higher than that of the publicity in PPP projects; investor's social reputation is most important, it is a foundation for obtaining external resources and achieving enterprise development.

Research limitations/implications

Because of the chosen research approach, the demand indexes cannot be exhausted. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to enrich relevant contents further.

Practical implications

This paper includes implications for a targeted demand control mechanism and for managing the unreasonable demand.

Originality/value

This paper comprehensively identifies the demand hierarchy of the government and investors, and provides the theoretical basis for the target management of stakeholders.

Citation

Liu, J. and Liu, J. (2024), "The demand hierarchy of the government and investors in PPP projects", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 1539-1555. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-01-2022-0052