Search results

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.

Managers of megaprojects face social risk management challenges throughout the various design, construction, and operation stages, owing to the various conflicts of interest among stakeholders, public skepticism, and opposition. However, most existing studies have not focused on the dynamic analysis of integrating social risks in these stages. This study developed a dynamic analysis approach to explore the dynamics of critical social risk factors and related stakeholders of megaprojects and built the managerial maps for various stakeholders.

Based on the social analysis network (SNA), a dynamic network analysis approach for understanding the dynamics of social risk and related stakeholders has been developed by literature and case analysis. The approach comprises the following steps: (1) generating social risk–stakeholder networks in different stages; (2) analysis of the critical stakeholders and social risk factors; (3) dynamic analysis of social risk factors; and (4) developing social risk management maps for various stakeholders. To verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the approach, 40 megaprojects from China were analyzed.

According to the results, the local government is a critical stakeholder during all stages, inadequate information promotion (IIP) and imperfect communication and coordination mechanism (ICCM) are key social risk sources throughout the megaproject life cycle. Furthermore, the management maps for government organizations, project implementation groups, and external stakeholders were constructed.

This research has three contributions. First, a dynamic analysis approach of stakeholder-associated social risks in megaprojects is developed, which enriches the social risk management theory of megaprojects and provides inspiration for future research focus. Second, the social risk–stakeholder networks and critical social risks in different stages are confirmed to provide a more valid and accurate picture of social risk management in megaprojects. Third, the social risk managerial maps for different stakeholders built in this research will be beneficial for governments, project implementation groups, and external stakeholders to optimize management strategies.

Most megaprojects focus on overcoming current infrastructure capacity problems or opening up new business opportunities, while a few may be inspired by iconic-symbolic or socio-political drivers. Also, many megaprojects may be seen to focus on benefitting proximate stakeholders in the short-medium term. A case is made here, for aligning the immediate expectations from a megaproject with a parallel focus on the best overall value for all, including long-term stakeholders, thereby also targeting more meaningful and sustainable contributions to the built environment. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper draws together and synergises relevant findings from two completed PhD projects and another research project in Hong Kong. Additionally, a focused literature survey and a case study, also contribute to the development of the proposed concepts and strategies. This is therefore a hybrid between a “review” paper and a “conceptual” paper where a suite of significant improvements to current practice are conceptualised and proposed, based on logical integration of relevant findings from the above three research projects, literature review and case study.

Inadequate stakeholder engagement has led to many process disruptions and adverse outcomes in recent megaprojects. A structured approach focusing throughout on common overall value from the outset is proposed to achieve better and more sustainable megaproject outcomes. Specific recommendations include: aligning megaproject stakeholder objectives with regional or even national needs and targeting co-creation of common value through early stakeholder involvement in planning and design of built infrastructure megaprojects.

The increasing number, scale and complexity of megaprojects has amplified their impact on the built environment and its sustainability, hence the imperative to incorporate sustainability considerations, so as to formulate and manage megaprojects better. The proposed approaches in this paper can help revamp megaproject strategies towards such sustainable outcomes.

Detecting precursory signals is critical to increasing the resilience of megaprojects to crises. This study aims to investigate key crisis precursors to better apprehend traces of megaproject crises and proactively respond to approaching crises, thereby increasing project resilience.

Drawing on the theory of weak signals, 25 potential precursors of megaproject crises are extracted. Using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), four models were tested to identify key crisis precursors based on a questionnaire survey of 168 megaproject participants in China. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to examine the differences in participants’ perceptions of key crisis precursors.

Four key crisis precursors were identified: Imbalance of Benefits and Costs, Irresponsible and Unqualified Key Participants, Regulatory Mechanisms Lacking Transparency and Flexibility, and Information Uncertainty and Asymmetry. Compared with senior executives, team members think that key crisis precursors related to regulatory mechanisms and key participants are more likely to trigger crises, which affects responsive actions toward detected crisis precursors. The findings help identify problems at an early stage and enable timely intervention to mitigate crises.

Detection of key crisis precursors allows for proactive and targeted actions to mitigate crises. Megaproject development is affected by institutional mechanisms. The influence of institutions on the effectiveness of crisis management needs further investigation.

Limited attention has been paid to recognizing precursors of megaproject crises. This study identifies four key crisis precursors by uncovering the interrelationships among potential precursors, which enables rapid adaptation to future crises.

In the past few decades, traditional project management theories mainly focused on quality, cost and schedule. However, with larger scale and wider influence of infrastructure projects, especially in megaprojects, social problems have gradually become pressing issues in the field of project governance. As the public is the main body of society, public participation has attracted the attention from both the academic field and industry field. Despite people are gradually realizing the significance of public participation, a deeper and more systematic understanding is still needed to be developed in this field. Therefore, this paper aims to conduct a systematic literature review on public participation in infrastructure projects. Based on existing literatures, this paper draws a knowledge map and develops a research framework in this field. Also, this paper tries to provide some theoretical and practical directions for the future.

In total, 142 papers from Web of Science Core collection were selected to be used in this systematic review. Quantitative analysis of this paper is concentrated on the knowledge map with bibliometric tools. Qualitative analysis is concentrated on identifying the research framework.

This paper reviewed existing literatures and the results are as below. Firstly, the results show a knowledge map containing knowledge domains, knowledge frontiers and knowledge evolution of research fields in public participation. Secondly, the results indicate a research framework in this field, including situational dimension, implementation dimension, individual dimension and influence dimension. Moreover, each dimension has several research topics, respectively. Finally, according to the results, the paper proposes practical suggestions for stakeholders and research directions for further study.

It is the first paper to draw a holistic knowledge map and build up a multilevel framework for public participation in the field of infrastructure projects. This paper bridges the gap in both quantitative and qualitative identification of existing literatures in this field. Besides, this paper proposes some practical suggestions and research directions for further study and development of public participation.

By mobilizing the empirical setting of a megaproject, this study problematizes public budgeting as participatory practice. The authors suggest that megaprojects are prone to democratic legitimacy challenges due to a long history of cost overruns, which provides stakeholders with a chance to dramatize a budgetary controversy.

Through article and document data, the authors reconstructed a controversy that emerged around the budget of Stockholm/Åre’s candidature for the Olympic Winter Games 2026. The authors used Boltanski and Thévenot's (2006) orders of worth to systematically analyze the justification work of key stakeholder groups involved in the controversy.

This study illustrates that a budgetary controversy was actively maintained by stakeholder groups, which resulted in a lack of public support and the eventual demise of the Olympic candidature. As such, the authors provide a more nuanced understanding of public budgeting as a controversy-based process vis-à-vis a wider public with regard to the broken institution of megaprojects.

This study suggests more attention to the disruptive power of public scrutiny and the dramatization of budgeting in megaprojects. In this empirical case, the authors show how stakeholders tend to take their technical concerns too far in order to challenge a budget, even though megaprojects generally provide an ill-suited setting for accurate forecasts.

While studies around the financial legacies of megaprojects have somewhat matured, very few have looked at pitching them. However, the authors argue that megaprojects are increasingly faced with financial skepticism upon their approval upfront.

The purpose of this paper is to explore top government hands-on megaproject management model applied to Istanbul’s new airport megaproject. The study aims to find an answer to this research question: “How is the organizational design and management of a megaproject that has been alive in a confrontational socio-political environment and whose national strategic importance is high?”

Organizational theory and critical theory perspectives are used in this study. Istanbul’s grand airport is chosen as the case study. Interview, focus group and document analysis methods are used together. The research yields data from qualitative resources. Verbal and written materials are organized into three major themes and 27 key subjects for content analysis.

A top level of organizational management can be attained in the state in order for the mega projects with high national strategic importance to survive without problems and with high performance. The top government-level organizational structure implemented at Istanbul’s new airport has reduced complexity, risk and uncertainty; increased performance and product quality; and strenghtened inter-organizational compatibility and communication within the megaproject organization. However, this structuring also increased centralization, reduced transparency and direct public participation in the decision-making process.

The megaproject is run in strict confidence and limited information is shared gradually in a controlled way with public by the megaproject organization. Therefore, a qualitative methodology is followed and the usage of quantitative data remained limited in the research.

The study presents an exemplary top government-level megaproject management model for countries experiencing strong socio-political conflicts and aiming to perform megaprojects with high national strategic importance.

The organization of Istanbul’s new airport megaproject offers an exemplary, flexible and innovative organizational management model for countries that want to realize mega projects with high national strategic importance and experience strong socio-political conflicts. The questions of how to cope with challenges, how to build management capabilities and how to improve the cooperation and coordination within megaprojects have found some answers with this study. In addition, this study provides an insight into how to make more effective objections to wrong megaproject practices and the right strategies that the opposing organizations can follow.

This empirical research widens and deepens the theoretical foundations of top government hands-on megaproject management. The study, which includes a process analysis, allows to better understand the philosophy, nature, success, planning process, social organization and dynamics of megaprojects and to explain them through the values and strategies of organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to glean leadership lessons of megaproject managers through the life stories of four purposefully selected managers from two contemporary and two landmark megaprojects.

A narrative inquiry approach applying thematic analysis is used to capture lessons learnt from these stories with a focus on leading megaprojects. Narrative analysis has been used in organization studies and this paper is an attempt to use it in project management research.

Common strategies used by all four megaproject managers to be successful include: selecting the right people and building their capability; building trust with stakeholders; dealing with institutional power and politics effectively; and having the courage to innovate. There were also some differences in the approaches used by these managers due the times in which these projects were implemented.

The use of narrative inquiry is new to project management literature. As the life stories were not presented in the same way it was difficult to analyze them in the same manner, and further data had to be collected. This could have been avoided if it were feasible to collect narratives directly from the megaproject managers. This is being planned in future research emerging from this paper.

This study helps megaproject managers to exhibit leadership attributes that would be required to execute such large complex projects that have wide implications for the society, economy and the environment.

Megaprojects are often considered major displacements that cause social and geophysical issues that affect the environment. Lessons learnt from these stories could be useful to avoid such issues. The stories analyzed showed the human side of the megaproject managers toward people related, health and societal issues.

Narrative inquiry is new to project management literature. In the past, project management literature has focused on extracting lessons learnt from historical and classical projects, but lessons from life stories of project managers have not been used for the same purpose.

Since megaproject social responsibility (MSR) has received increasing attention in megaproject management and plays critical roles in megaproject practices, the purpose of this paper is to explore how MSR facilitates an improved sustainability of the construction industry.

By integrating multiple theoretical perspectives of transaction cost theory, institutionalism and attention- and resource-based views, and by using survey data of Chinese megaprojects and construction enterprises, this paper offers a theoretical elaboration of and an empirical investigation into the impacts that MSR’s four dimensions exert on industrial improvement in economic sustainability and social responsibility.

The study’s empirical results indicate that MSR has positive impacts on improving the sustainability of the construction industry, and that such positive impacts are weakened by the interactions of primary stakeholders in the megaprojects but are strengthened by the interactions of secondary stakeholders.

This paper suggests that managers and policymakers make efforts to governmental guidance, media monitoring and public participation in megaprojects, so as to limit the potential unethical behaviors in megaproject management and enhance the sociopolitical legitimacy that are essential for the sustainability of the construction industry.

By analyzing the industrial outcomes of MSR, this paper extends studies on the topic beyond the current literature’s focus on the antecedents of MSR, and it enriches the research on MSR stakeholders by elaborating on the contingent roles of the various stakeholders in megaproject management.

Executive sponsors play a significant role in the success of megaprojects which, in turn, affect national economies and millions of people. However, the literature on the requisite attributes of project sponsors on megaprojects is still sparse. The purpose of the paper is to provide guidelines to company boards and executives who are tasked to appoint suitable executive sponsors to megaprojects. Thus, the paper contributes to the sparse literature on megaproject sponsors.

A total of 26 senior managers, with experience in megaprojects ranging from 8 to 15 years – and who were involved in 6 recent megaprojects with a combined value of US$13.75bn – were interviewed on the attributes of megaproject sponsors. Transcriptions of semi-structured, open-ended interviews were analysed with computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS).

The study identified the most essential attribute as appropriate seniority, being empowered and accountable, with appropriate seniority, being empowered and accountable, with apposite credibility and with both personal and positional power. The study also uncovered 13 attributes – all components of “competence” – which have not previously been explicitly identified in literature as elements of sponsor “competence”.

In the current study guidelines are provided for the selection and appointment of appropriate megaproject sponsors.