A comparative review of quantitative VFM methodology for PPP infrastructure project in Indonesia and Australia

The Government of Indonesia (GoI) increasingly relies on the private sector financing to build and operate infrastructures through public private partnership (PPP) schemes. However, PPP does not automatically provide the solution for the financing scheme due to value for money (VFM) issues. The procurement authority must show whether a PPP proposal is the optimal solution that provides best VFM outcome. The paper presents a literature review of comparing quantitative VFM methodology for PPP infrastructure project procurement in Indonesia and Australia. Public Sector Comparator (PSC) is used to assess the potential project VFM quantitatively in Australia. In Indonesia, the PSC has not been applied, where the PPP procurement authority tends to utilize a common project evaluation method that ignores the issues of risk. Unlike the conventional price bid evaluation, the PSC enables a financial comparison including costs/gains and risks. Since the construction of PSC is primarily on risk management approach, it can facilitate risk negotiation processes between the involved parties. The study indicates that the quantitative VFM methodology of PSC is potentially applicable in Indonesia for water supply sector. Various supporting regulations are available that emphasize the importance of VFM and risk management in infrastructure investment. However, the study also reveals a number of challenges that need to be anticipated, such as the need of a more comprehensive PPP policy at both central and local government level, a more specific legal instrument for bidding evaluation method and the issue of institutional capacity development in PPP Units at the local level.

Evaluations of Process Modeling Grammars : Ontological, Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses Using the Example of BPMN

Business processes have emerged as a well-respected variable in the design of successful corporations. However, unlike other key managerial variables, such as products and services, customers and employees, physical or digital assets, the conceptualization and management of business processes are in many respects in their infancy. In this book, Jan Recker investigates the notion of quality of business process modeling grammars. His evaluation is based on an ontological-, qualitative-, and quantitative analysis, applied to BPMN, a widely-used business process modeling grammar. His results reveal the ontological shortcomings of BPMN and how these manifest themselves in actual process modeling practice, as well as how they influence the usage behavior of modeling practitioners. More generally, his book constitutes a landmark for empirical technology assessment, analyzing the way in which design flaws in technology influence usage behavior.

Incorporating parameter uncertainty into quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA)

Modern statistical models and computational methods can now incorporate uncertainty of the parameters used in Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessments (QMRA). Many QMRAs use Monte Carlo methods, but work from fixed estimates for means, variances and other parameters. We illustrate the ease of estimating all parameters contemporaneously with the risk assessment, incorporating all the parameter uncertainty arising from the experiments from which these parameters are estimated. A Bayesian approach is adopted, using Markov Chain Monte Carlo Gibbs sampling (MCMC) via the freely available software, WinBUGS. The method and its ease of implementation are illustrated by a case study that involves incorporating three disparate datasets into an MCMC framework. The probabilities of infection when the uncertainty associated with parameter estimation is incorporated into a QMRA are shown to be considerably more variable over various dose ranges than the analogous probabilities obtained when constants from the literature are simply ‘plugged’ in as is done in most QMRAs. Neglecting these sources of uncertainty may lead to erroneous decisions for public health and risk management.

Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches in cross-cultural research

The affects associated with culture, the values inherent in cultures and the identification of cultural assumptions are popular topics in recent management and Information Systems (IS) research. The main focus in relevant IS research over the years, has been on the comparison of cultural artifacts in different cultural settings. Despite these studies we need to ask whether there is a general approach to how culture can be researched in a rigorous manner? What are the issues that arise in cross- cultural research that have a bearing on decisions about a suitable research approach? What are the most appropriate methodologies to be used in cross-cultural research? Which is more appropriate, a qualitative, a quantitative or a mixed- method research approach? This paper will discuss important considerations in the process of deciding on the best research approach for cross-cultural projects. A case study will be then be reported as an example revealing the merits of integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches followed by a thorough discussion on the issues which may arise during this process.

The Australian Grey Nomads : are they who we think they are? Enhancing formative research through the quantitative assessment of psychological constructs

Issue addressed: Measures of 'social identity' and 'psychological sense of community' were included within a broader formative research inquiry to gain insight into the identity characteristics and level of connectedness among older recreational road travellers (commonly known as Grey Nomads). The research sought to gain insights on how best to reach or speak to this growing driver cohort. ----- ----- Method: Participants included 631 older recreational road travellers ranging in age from 50 years to over 80 years. Data were obtained through three scales which were incorporated into a larger formative research survey; an identity hierarchy, the Three Factor Model of Social Identity and the Sense of Community Index. ----- ----- Results: Older recreational road travellers see themselves principally as couples, with social group identity being secondary. Although many identified to some degree with the Grey Nomad identity, when asked to self categorise as either members of the Broad Network of Recreational Vehicle Travellers or as Grey Nomads, the majority categorised themselves as the former. Those identifying as Grey Nomads, however, reported significantly higher levels of 'social identification' and 'sense of community'. ----- ----- Conclusion: The Grey Nomad identity may not be the best identity at which to target road safety messages for this cohort. Targeting travelling 'couples' may be more efficacious. Using the 'Grey Nomad' identity is likely to reap at least some success, however, given that many identified to some degree with this group identity. Those identifying as Grey Nomads may be more open to community participation or behaviour change given their significantly higher levels of 'social identity' and 'sense of community'.

Rural activity spaces and transport disadvantage : qualitative analysis of quantitative models integrating time and space

Current knowledge about the relationship between transport disadvantage and activity space size is limited to urban areas, and as a result, very little is known to date about this link in a rural context. In addition, although research has identified transport disadvantaged groups based on their size of activity spaces, these studies have, however, not empirically explained such differences and the result is often a poor identification of the problems facing disadvantaged groups. Research has shown that transport disadvantage varies over time. The static nature of analysis using the activity space concept in previous research studies has lacked the ability to identify transport disadvantage in time. Activity space is a dynamic concept; and therefore possesses a great potential in capturing temporal variations in behaviour and access opportunities. This research derives measures of the size and fullness of activity spaces for 157 individuals for weekdays, weekends, and for a week using weekly activity-travel diary data from three case study areas located in rural Northern Ireland. Four focus groups were also conducted in order to triangulate the quantitative findings and to explain the differences between different socio-spatial groups. The findings of this research show that despite having a smaller sized activity space, individuals were not disadvantaged because they were able to access their required activities locally. Car-ownership was found to be an important life line in rural areas. Temporal disaggregation of the data reveals that this is true only on weekends due to a lack of public transport services. In addition, despite activity spaces being at a similar size, the fullness of activity spaces of low-income individuals was found to be significantly lower compared to their high-income counterparts. Focus group data shows that financial constraint, poor connections both between public transport services and between transport routes and opportunities forced individuals to participate in activities located along the main transport corridors.

The psychosocial factors influencing aggressive driving behaviour

Many drivers in highly motorised countries believe that aggressive driving is increasing. While the prevalence of the behaviour is difficult to reliably identify, the consequences of on-road aggression can be severe, with extreme cases resulting in property damage, injury and even death. This research program was undertaken to explore the nature of aggressive driving from within the framework of relevant psychological theory in order to enhance our understanding of the behaviour and to inform the development of relevant interventions. To guide the research a provisional ‘working’ definition of aggressive driving was proposed encapsulating the recurrent characteristics of the behaviour cited in the literature. The definition was: “aggressive driving is any on-road behaviour adopted by a driver that is intended to cause physical or psychological harm to another road user and is associated with feelings of frustration, anger or threat”. Two main theoretical perspectives informed the program of research. The first was Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, which identifies both the person-related and situational characteristics that contribute to aggressive driving, as well as proposing that aggressive behaviours can serve either an ‘instrumental’ or ‘hostile’ function. The second main perspective was Anderson and Bushman’s (2002) General Aggression Model. In contrast to Shinar’s model, the General Aggression Model reflects a broader perspective on human aggression that facilitates a more comprehensive examination of the emotional and cognitive aspects of aggressive behaviour. Study One (n = 48) examined aggressive driving behaviour from the perspective of young drivers as an at-risk group and involved conducting six focus groups, with eight participants in each. Qualitative analyses identified multiple situational and person-related factors that contribute to on-road aggression. Consistent with human aggression theory, examination of self-reported experiences of aggressive driving identified key psychological elements and processes that are experienced during on-road aggression. Participants cited several emotions experienced during an on-road incident: annoyance, frustration, anger, threat and excitement. Findings also suggest that off-road generated stress may transfer to the on-road environment, at times having severe consequences including crash involvement. Young drivers also appeared quick to experience negative attributions about the other driver, some having additional thoughts of taking action. Additionally, the results showed little difference between males and females in the severity of behavioural responses they were prepared to adopt, although females appeared more likely to displace their negative emotions. Following the self-reported on-road incident, evidence was also found of a post-event influence, with females being more likely to experience ongoing emotional effects after the event. This finding was evidenced by ruminating thoughts or distraction from tasks. However, the impact of such a post-event influence on later behaviours or interpersonal interactions appears to be minimal. Study Two involved the quantitative analysis of n = 926 surveys completed by a wide age range of drivers from across Queensland. The study aimed to explore the relationships between the theoretical components of aggressive driving that were identified in the literature review, and refined based on the findings of Study One. Regression analyses were used to examine participant emotional, cognitive and behavioural responses to two differing on-road scenarios whilst exploring the proposed theoretical framework. A number of socio-demographic, state and trait person-related variables such as age, pre-study emotions, trait aggression and problem-solving style were found to predict the likelihood of a negative emotional response such as frustration, anger, perceived threat, negative attributions and the likelihood of adopting either an instrumental or hostile behaviour in response to Scenarios One and Two. Complex relationships were found to exist between the variables, however, they were interpretable based on the literature review findings. Factor analysis revealed evidence supporting Shinar’s (1998) dichotomous description of on-road aggressive behaviours as being instrumental or hostile. The second stage of Study Two used logistic regression to examine the factors that predicted the potentially hostile aggressive drivers (n = 88) within the sample. These drivers were those who indicated a preparedness to engage in direct acts of interpersonal aggression on the road. Young, male drivers 17–24 years of age were more likely to be classified as potentially hostile aggressive drivers. Young drivers (17–24 years) also scored significantly higher than other drivers on all subscales of the Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992) and on the ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive careless style’ subscales of the Social Problem Solving Inventory – Revised (D’Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002). The potentially hostile aggressive drivers were also significantly more likely to engage in speeding and drink/drug driving behaviour. With regard to the emotional, cognitive and behavioural variables examined, the potentially hostile aggressive driver group also scored significantly higher than the ‘other driver’ group on most variables examined in the proposed theoretical framework. The variables contained in the framework of aggressive driving reliably distinguished potentially hostile aggressive drivers from other drivers (Nagalkerke R2 = .39). Study Three used a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of the psychosocial characteristics of n = 10 (9 males and 1 female) self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers. The self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers were aged 24–55 years of age. A large proportion of these drivers reported a Year 10 education or better and average–above average incomes. As a group, the drivers reported committing a number of speeding and unlicensed driving offences in the past three years and extensive histories of violations outside of this period. Considerable evidence was also found of exposure to a range of developmental risk factors for aggression that may have contributed to the driver’s on-road expression of aggression. These drivers scored significantly higher on the Aggression Questionnaire subscales and Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised subscales, ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive/careless style’, than the general sample of drivers included in Study Two. The hostile aggressive driver also scored significantly higher on the Barrett Impulsivity Scale – 11 (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995) measure of impulsivity than a male ‘inmate’, or female ‘general psychiatric’ comparison group. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey (Carlson, 1982), the self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers scored equal or higher scores than the comparison group of incarcerated individuals on the subscale measures of chemical abuse, thought disturbance, anti-social tendencies and self-depreciation. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey personality profiles, seven participants were profiled ‘markedly anti-social’, two were profiled ‘negative-explosive’ and one was profiled as ‘self-centred’. Qualitative analysis of the ten case study self-reports of on-road hostile aggression revealed a similar range of on-road situational factors to those identified in the literature review and Study One. Six of the case studies reported off-road generated stress that they believed contributed to the episodes of aggressive driving they recalled. Intense ‘anger’ or ‘rage’ were most frequently used to describe the emotions experienced in response to the perceived provocation. Less frequently ‘excitement’ and ‘fear’ were cited as relevant emotions. Notably, five of the case studies experienced difficulty articulating their emotions, suggesting emotional difficulties. Consistent with Study Two, these drivers reported negative attributions and most had thoughts of aggressive actions they would like to take. Similarly, these drivers adopted both instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours during the self-reported incident. Nine participants showed little or no remorse for their behaviour and these drivers also appeared to exhibit low levels of personal insight. Interestingly, few incidents were brought to the attention of the authorities. Further, examination of the person-related characteristics of these drivers indicated that they may be more likely to have come from difficult or dysfunctional backgrounds and to have a history of anti-social behaviours on and off the road. The research program has several key theoretical implications. While many of the findings supported Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, two key areas of difference emerged. Firstly, aggressive driving behaviour does not always appear to be frustration driven, but can also be driven by feelings of excitation (consistent with the tenets of the General Aggression Model). Secondly, while the findings supported a distinction being made between instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours, the characteristics of these two types of behaviours require more examination. For example, Shinar (1998) proposes that a driver will adopt an instrumental aggressive behaviour when their progress is impeded if it allows them to achieve their immediate goals (e.g. reaching their destination as quickly as possible); whereas they will engage in hostile aggressive behaviour if their path to their goal is blocked. However, the current results question this assertion, since many of the hostile aggressive drivers studied appeared prepared to engage in hostile acts irrespective of whether their goal was blocked or not. In fact, their behaviour appeared to be characterised by a preparedness to abandon their immediate goals (even if for a short period of time) in order to express their aggression. The use of the General Aggression Model enabled an examination of the three components of the ‘present internal state’ comprising emotions, cognitions and arousal and how these influence the likelihood of a person responding aggressively to an on-road situation. This provided a detailed insight into both the cognitive and emotional aspects of aggressive driving that have important implications for the design of relevant countermeasures. For example, the findings highlighted the potential value of utilising Cognitive Behavioural Therapy with aggressive drivers, particularly the more hostile offenders. Similarly, educational efforts need to be mindful of the way that person-related factors appear to influence one’s perception of another driver’s behaviour as aggressive or benign. Those drivers with a predisposition for aggression were more likely to perceive aggression or ‘wrong doing’ in an ambiguous on-road situation and respond with instrumental and/or hostile behaviour, highlighting the importance of perceptual processes in aggressive driving behaviour.