Search results

Delay and disruption claims involve a complex process that often result in disputes, unnecessary expenses and time loss on construction projects. This study aims to review and synthesize the contributions of previous research undertaken in this area and propose future directions for improving the process of delay and disruption claims.

This study adopted a holistic systematic review of literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. A total of 230 articles were shortlisted related to delay and disruption claims in construction using Scopus and Web of Science databases.

Six research themes were identified and critically reviewed including delay analysis, disruption analysis, claim management, contract administration, dispute resolution and delay and disruption information and records. The systematic review showed that there is a dearth of research on managing the wide-ranging information required for delay and disruption claims, ensuring the transparency and uniformity in delay and disruption claims’ information and adopting an end-user’s centred research approach for resolving the problems in the process of delay and disruption claims.

Complexities in delay and disruption claims are real-world problems faced by industry practitioners. The findings will help the research community and industry practitioners to prioritize their energies toward information management of delay and disruption claims.

This study contributes to the body of knowledge in delay and disruption claims by identifying the need for conducting more research on its information requirements and management. Subsequently, it provides an insight on the use of modern technologies such as drones, building information modeling, radio frequency identifiers, blockchain, Bigdata and machine learning, as tools for more structured and efficient attainment of required information in a transparent and consistent manner. It also recommends greater use of design science research approach for delay and disruption claims. This will help to ensure delay and disruption claims are the least complex and less dispute-prone process.

Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) are crucial to the procurement of global infrastructure projects. Moreover, a price mode based on a cluster of core concessionary items is key to the delivery of value-for-money and successful project outcomes. However, existing research has yet to fully identify PPP concessionary items, nor yet described the range of practical price modes. This study provides taxonomy of core concessionary items impacting PPP projects, systematically classifies price modes, and assesses the applicability and risk impacts of those price modes on PPP projects.

This study adopts a comparative case study method in analyzing core concessionary items and alternative price modes. China is taken as the context, as it is one of the world’s largest PPP markets. In ensuring research validity and reliability, diverse data sources are utilized, with a graphic content analysis tool developed to capture the structure of price modes.

Eight PPP price modes are identified. These are: (1) UP (Unit Price) mode, (2) ALS (Annual Lump Sum) mode, (3) IRR (Internal Rate of Return) mode, (4) RP (Return for Investing Capital (RIC) - Profit Rate of O&M (PROM)) mode, (5) RFP (RIC - Financing Interest Rate (FR) - PROM) mode, (6) RFPL (RIC - FR - PROM - Lower Limit of User Charge (LLoUC)) mode, (7) RFL (RIC - FR - Lump Sum/Fixed Unit Price O&M Contract (LSOM/FUP)) mode, and (8) RFLL (RIC - FR - LSOM/FUP - LLoUC) mode. Other main findings are as follows: (1) Five risk allocation configurations can be achieved via these price modes. Yet while different price modes enable the allocation of specific risks, these do not always align with contracting parties’ original intentions. (2) IRR and RP modes may be less applicable in general because of their vulnerability in allocating critical risks and capacity for spurring opportunistic behavior.

By depicting the paths by which concessionary items in price modes affect cash flow, a systematic analysis of price modes was conducted exposing structural characteristics, along with risk allocation choice implications. The study is unique in: (1) Providing a systematic classification of PPP price modes used in PPP projects, (2) Presenting a comprehensive identification and streamlining of concessionary items in PPP practice, and (3) Analyzing the risk effects of different price modes. Together, these outcomes offer a hitherto unavailable perspective on PPP project risk management. The value of the study lies in the following: (1) Existing studies employ diverse concessionary items, but their applicability varies. This study offers an overarching framework facilitating decision-making in selecting appropriate PPP price modes and in determining concessionary items. (2) This study adds to the understanding of PPP price modes in significant ways that will aid local governments and potential sponsors in crafting and administrating more workable contract designs.