Search results

The belt and road initiative (BRI) emanates from China and seeks to connect Europe, Asia and Africa through transport and telecommunications infrastructure. Despite the importance of Africa in the BRI network, very little research has been done on the BRI in Africa, and even less of this emanates from Africa itself. In particular, considering that the BRI investments in Africa are largely transport related, there is almost no research covering the area of logistics, which should be greatly affected by the infrastructure investments. This paper sought to establish the current state of logistics research related to the BRI in Africa.

A bibliometric analysis was conducted on documents extracted from the SCOPUS database.

The findings indicate that there is a lack of research in critical areas such as environmental, social and economic impact of BRI transport investments, governance, logistics performance and international cooperation. In particular, there is a massive gap in local knowledge regarding the BRI.

The study is limited to published research indexed in the SCOPUS database. Future research directions include empirical studies into BRI project initiation investigation, economic and environmental impacts, governance structures and policy intervention requirements and macro-level logistics impacts.

The study emphasises the importance publishing all the relevant information regarding BRI related projects in Africa to create transparency.

The study investigates the current research on the effect of China's BRI on transport and logistics in Africa through a bibliometric analysis. The investigation reveals that while there are huge investments in infrastructure, the actual effect on logistics of participating countries in Africa has not been interrogated.

By adopting the “hard” and “soft” project management (PM) approaches from the PM-literature, this paper aims to problematize the expected role of client organizations in driving innovation in the transport infrastructure sector.

Addressing a large public client in Sweden, a case study design was initially applied to provide in-depth insights and perspectives of client project managers’ views and experiences of managing projects expected to drive innovation. In this paper, the concepts of “hard” and “soft” are used to discuss empirical findings on challenges associated with adopting a PM-approach for driving innovation in projects. The empirical material consists of interview data, complemented with observations and archival data.

Findings reveal challenges associated with combining hard and soft approaches, frequently demonstrating difficulties in balancing short-term project expectations with the promotion of innovation. In line with the literature, project managers note that there is a need for soft approaches to promote development and drive innovation. Yet, findings reflect a situation in which operational success criteria predominate, whereas soft approaches are not sufficiently used to create the grounds required for fostering innovation.

Insights are provided into how PM-approaches may impact construction innovation in the infrastructure sector, demonstrating a need for further research on the challenges and implications of applying and combining hard and soft PM-approaches.

For a number of years, the construction industry has seen an ongoing shift from design-bid-build to design-build contracts. This transition in contract type entails changes for both the organizations and the individuals involved. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how the client manages the transition between the different contract types from an organizational change perspective in a project-led organization.

A multiple case study of six infrastructure projects with DB contracts, all managed by the Swedish Transport Administration, was conducted. The major source of data is semi-structured interviews with respondents from both the client and the contractors.

Results suggest that the transition has resulted in a mix of design-bid-build and design-build as contract type owing to issues when changing in a project-led organization. A change in vision also requires a concomitant change in culture, systems and roles.

The study only includes cases from the Swedish transport infrastructure sector, which limits the generalizability. The findings are also indicative owing to the small number of cases.

The findings further our understanding of managing change in complex projects, which might help practitioners to manage change in a more integrated way.

The findings enrich our understanding of the systemic change that a switch in contract types can have in inter-organizational complex projects such as transport infrastructure projects. Furthermore, it emphasizes the intricate task of change management in project-led organizations and its effects on roles and responsibilities.

This article critically analyses the extent to which selected Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) transportation projects in the Caribbean subregion embrace good practices and how they benefit the public sector.

The article begins with the general rationale of PPPs, leading to a discussion on the specific challenges of the Caribbean subregion and an assessment of certain critical projects. The sample cases include the L F Wade International Airport in Bermuda, the cruise berthing and cargo port redevelopment project in the Cayman Islands, and the Sanger International Airport in Jamaica. There are five aspects to the critical assessment: (a) an evaluation of the type of PPP arrangement used; (b) the legal/policy framework; (c) financial implications; (d) accountability; and (e) miscellaneous data. Desk-based research is conducted as supported by both international and local sources to convey a uniquely local perspective in this under-researched area of scholarship.

PPP frameworks in the Caribbean are improving quickly but remain a work in progress. Jamaica leads the region. Bermuda trails behind. Problems of legal compliance with frameworks and limited market engagement persist, leading to risk management problems.

This article fills a literature gap on critical analysis of individual Caribbean PPP transportation projects. Previous reports, mostly by international organisations, cover regional or sectorial trends. Other sources take a descriptive but not critical approach.

The unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has further constrained the budgets of governments worldwide for delivering their much-needed infrastructure. Consequently, public-private partnerships (PPPs), with the private sector's investment and ingenuity, would appear to be an increasingly popular alternative. Value for money (VfM) has become the major criterion for evaluating PPPs against the traditional public sector procurement and, however, is plagued with controversy. Hence, it is important that governments compare and contrast their practice with similar and disparate bodies to engender best practice. This paper, therefore, aims to understand governments' assessment context and provide a cross-continental comparison of their VfM assessment.

Faced with different domestic contexts (e.g. aging infrastructure, population growth, and competing demands on finance), governments tend to place different emphases when undertaking the VfM assessment. In line with the theory of boundary spanning, a cross-continental comparison is conducted between three of the most noticeable PPP markets (i.e. the United Kingdom, Australia and China) about their VfM assessment. The institutional level is interpreted by a social, economic and political framework, and the methodological level is elucidated through a qualitative and quantitative VfM assessment.

There are individual institutional characteristics that have shaped the way each country assesses VfM. For the methodological level, we identify that: (1) these global markets use a public sector comparator as the benchmark in VfM assessment; (2) ambiguous qualitative assessment is conducted only against PPPs to strengthen their policy development; (3) Australia's priority is in service provision whereas that of the UK and China is project finance and production; and (4) all markets are seeking an amelioration of existing controversial VfM assessments so that purported VfM relates to project lifecycles. As such, an option framework is proposed to make headway towards a sensible selection of infrastructure procurement approaches in the post COVID-19 era.

This study addresses a current void of enhancing the decision-making process for using PPPs within today's changing environment and then opens up an avenue for future empirical research to examine the option framework and ensuing VfM decisions. Practically, it presents a holistic VfM landscape for public sector procurers that aim to engage with PPPs for their infrastructure interventions.

Uncertainty, a state of unknowing linked to threats and opportunities, is a key characteristic of megaprojects, making it challenging for government officials and politicians to decide on their initiation. For them, implementation by the private sector adds an extra layer of complexity and uncertainty to megaproject planning. In this context, only a few studies have focussed on governing and the mobilization of uncertainty arguments in communication between government actors and private developers either in favour of or against megaprojects. The purpose of this article is to shed light on how private megaproject proposals progress towards political acceptance or rejection in public decision-making.

This process of public decision-making on private megaproject proposals is examined in the case of the Helsinki–Tallinn undersea rail tunnel. In line with the interpretive research tradition, the authors’ study draws on a qualitative methodology underpinned by social constructionism. The research process can be characterized as abductive.

The authors’ findings suggest that while public decision-making on megaprojects is a conflictual and dynamic process, some types of uncertainty are relatively more important in affecting the perceived feasibility of the projects in the eyes of public sector decision-makers.

This study contributes to the debate on uncertainty management in megaprojects, proposing a new type of uncertainty – uncertainty about privateness – which has not been explicitly visible thus far.

The purpose of this paper is to study public project governance frameworks in various ministries and agencies in Norway, following the introduction of such a framework on the topmost level (i.e. the cabinet) which applies to the very largest projects.

The study is methodologically designed as a qualitative assessment of project governance frameworks that apply to state-funded investment projects in selected sectors, based on data gathered through document reviews and interviews.

The study finds that all of the agencies have introduced their own project governance frameworks, which are basically consistent with the recommendations from the project management literature and with the cabinet’s overall requirements in Norway. By contrast, only one ministry has taken a formalized role as a project owner. Governance tasks thus seem to be extensively delegated to the subordinate agencies. This even includes strategic tasks such as project selection and portfolio management, and implies there is a risk that public project governance has a narrow and internal focus.

The paper is a first step toward a better understanding of public project governance as a hierarchical system and the relationship between project owners on three levels, the cabinet, the sectoral ministry, and the government agency.