Practice briefing : Is BOT the best financing model to procure infrastructure projects? A case study of the Hong Kong-Shuhai-Macau Bridge

Abstract: Purpose – Several major infrastructure projects in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) have been delivered by the build-operate-transfer (BOT) model since the 1960s. Although the benefits of using BOT have been reported abundantly in the contemporary literature, some BOT projects were less successful than the others. This paper aims to find out why this is so and to explore whether BOT is the best financing model to procure major infrastructure projects. Design/methodology/approach – The benefits of BOT will first be reviewed. Some completed BOT projects in Hong Kong will be examined to ascertain how far the perceived benefits of BOT have been materialized in these projects. A highly profiled project, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, which has long been promoted by the governments of the People's Republic of China, Macau Special Administrative Region and the HKSAR that BOT is the preferred financing model, but suddenly reverted back to the traditional financing model to be funded primarily by the three governments with public money instead, will be studied to explore the true value of the BOT financial model. Findings – Six main reasons for this radical change are derived from the analysis: shorter take-off time for the project; difference in legal systems causing difficulties in drafting BOT agreements; more government control on tolls; private sector uninterested due to unattractive economic package; avoid allegation of collusion between business and the governments; and a comfortable financial reserve possessed by the host governments. Originality/value – The findings from this paper are believed to provide a better understanding to the real benefits of BOT and the governments' main decision criteria in delivering major infrastructure projects.

Value-mapping for major economic infrastructure projects

The establishment of corporate objectives regarding economic, environmental, social, and ethical responsibilities, to inform business practice, has been gaining credibility in the business sector since the early 1990’s. This is witnessed through (i) the formation of international forums for sustainable and accountable development, (ii) the emergence of standards, systems, and frameworks to provide common ground for regulatory and corporate dialogue, and (iii) the significant quantum of relevant popular and academic literature in a diverse range of disciplines. How then has this move towards greater corporate responsibility become evident in the provision of major urban infrastructure projects? The gap identified, in both academic literature and industry practice, is a structured and auditable link between corporate intent and project outcomes. Limited literature has been discovered which makes a link between corporate responsibility; project performance indicators (or critical success factors) and major infrastructure provision. This search revealed that a comprehensive mapping framework, from an organisation’s corporate objectives through to intended, anticipated and actual outcomes and impacts has not yet been developed for the delivery of such projects. The research problem thus explored is ‘the need to better identify, map and account for the outcomes, impacts and risks associated with economic, environmental, social and ethical outcomes and impacts which arise from major economic infrastructure projects, both now, and into the future’. The methodology being used to undertake this research is based on Checkland’s soft system methodology, engaging in action research on three collaborative case studies. A key outcome of this research is a value-mapping framework applicable to Australian public sector agencies. This is a decision-making methodology which will enable project teams responsible for delivering major projects, to better identify and align project objectives and impacts with stated corporate objectives.

Developing an integrated decision model for the enhancement of sustainability deliverables for Australian road infrastructure projects

Road and highway infrastructure provides the backbone for a nation's economic growth. The versatile dispersion of population in Australia, from sparsely settled communities in remote areas to regenerated inner city suburbs with high density living in metropolitans, calls for continuing development and improvement on roads infrastructure under the current federal government policies and state governments' strategic plans. As road infrastructure projects involve large resources and mechanism, achieving sustainability not only in economic scales but also through environmental and social responsibility becomes a crucial issue. Current efforts are often impeded by different interpretation on sustainability agenda by stakeholders involved in these types of projects. As a result, sustainability deliverables at the project level is not often as transparent and measurable, compared to promises in project briefs and designs. This paper reviews the past studies on sustainable infrastructure construction, focusing on roads and highway projects. Through literature study and consultation with the industry, key sustainability indicators specific to road infrastructure projects have been identified. Based on these findings, this paper introduces an on-going research project aimed at identifying and integrating the different perceptions and priority needs of the stakeholders, and issues that impact on the gap between sustainability foci and its actual realization at project end level. The exploration helps generate an integrated decision-making model for sustainable road infrastructure projects. The research will promote to the industry more systematic and integrated approaches to decision-making on the implementation of sustainability strategies to achieve deliverable goals throughout the development and delivery process of road infrastructure projects in Australia.

Extending life-cycle costing (LCC) analysis for sustainability considerations in road infrastructure projects

Sustainable development is about making societal investments. These investments should be in synchronization with the natural environment, trends of social development, as well as organisational and local economies over a long time span. Traditionally in the eyes of clients, project development will need to produce the required profit margins, with some degrees of consideration for other impacts. This is being changed as all citizens of our society are becoming more aware of concepts and challenges such as the climate change, greenhouse footprints, and social dimensions of sustainability, and will in turn demand answers to these issues in built facilities. A large number of R&D projects have focused on the technical advancement and environmental assessment of products and built facilities. It is equally important address the cost/benefit issue, as developers in the world would not want to loose money by investing in built assets. For infrastructure projects, due to its significant cost of development and lengthy delivery time, presenting the full money story of going green is of vital importance. Traditional views of life-cycle costing tend to focus on the pure economics of a construction project. Sustainability concepts are not broadly integrated with the current LCCA in the construction sector. To rectify this problem, this paper reports on the progress to date of developing and extending contemporary LCCA models in the evaluation of road infrastructure sustainability. The suggested new model development is based on sustainability indicators identified through previous research, and incorporating industry verified cost elements of sustainability measures. The on-going project aims to design and a working model for sustainability life-cycle costing analysis for this type of infrastructure projects.

Framework and processes for enhancing sustainability deliverables in Australian road infrastructure projects

Road and highway infrastructure provides the backbone for a nation’s economic growth. The versatile dispersion of population in Australia and its resource boom, coupled with improved living standards and growing societal expectations, calls for continuing development and improvement of road infrastructure under the current local, state and federal governments’ policies and strategic plans. As road infrastructure projects involve huge resources and mechanisms, achieving sustainability not only on economic scales but also through environmental and social responsibility becomes a crucial issue. While sustainability is a logical link to infrastructure development, literature study and consultation with the industry found that there is a lack of common understanding on what constitutes sustainability in the infrastructure context. Its priorities are often interpreted differently among multiple stakeholders. For road infrastructure projects which typically span over long periods of time, achieving tangible sustainability outcomes during the lifecycle of development remains a formidable task. Sustainable development initiatives often remain ideological as in macro-level policies and broad-based concepts. There were little elaboration and exemplar cases on how these policies and concepts can be translated into practical decision-making during project implementation. In contrast, there seemed to be over commitment on research and development of sustainability assessment methods and tools. Between the two positions, there is a perception-reality gap and mismatch, specifically on how to enhance sustainability deliverables during infrastructure project delivery. Review on past research in this industry sector also found that little has been done to promote sustainable road infrastructure development; this has wide and varied potential impacts. This research identified the common perceptions and expectations by different stakeholders towards achieving sustainability in road and highway infrastructure projects. Face to face interviews on selected representatives of these stakeholders were carried out in order to select and categorize, confirm and prioritize a list of sustainability performance targets identified through literature and past research. A Delphi study was conducted with the assistance of a panel of senior industry professionals and academic experts, which further considered the interrelationship and influence of the sustainability indicators, and identified critical sustainability indicators under ten critical sustainability criteria (e.g. Environmental, Health & Safety, Resource Utilization & Management, Social & Cultural, Economic, Public Governance & Community Engagement, Relations Management, Engineering, Institutional and Project Management). This presented critical sustainability issues that needed to be addressed at the project level. Accordingly, exemplar highway development projects were used as case studies to elicit solutions for the critical issues. Through the identification and integration of different perceptions and priority needs of the stakeholders, as well as key sustainability indicators and solutions for critical issues, a set of decision-making guidelines was developed to promote and drive consistent sustainability deliverables in road infrastructure projects.

Public participation, values and interests in the procurement of infrastructure projects in Australia : a review and future research direction

In many countries, the main providers for major infrastructure projects are government or public agencies. Public infrastructure projects includes economic and social infrastructure such as transportation, education and health facilities. Most decision-making models for delivery of public infrastructure projects are heavily weighted towards financial/economic factors. In Australia, public participation is an essential instrument in the procurement of infrastructure and development within Australia. This study reviews the public participation, values and interests in the procurement of infrastructure projects in Australia, and identifies the research direction in this research area in order to improve the decision-making models that capture stakeholder social, economical and environmental concerns in infrastructure projects.

Applying the open innovation system concept to infrastructure projects

Purpose: The goal of this conceptual paper is to provide tools to help maximise the value delivered by infrastructure projects, by developing methods to increase adoption of innovative products during construction. Methods: The role of knowledge flows in determining innovation adoption rates is conceptually examined. A promising new approach is developed. Open innovation system theory is extended, by reviewing the role of three frameworks: (1) knowledge intermediaries, (2) absorptive capacity and (3) governance arrangements. Originality: We develop a novel open innovation system model to guide further research in the area of adoption of innovation on infrastructure projects. The open innovation system model currently lacks definition of core concepts, especially with regard to the impact of different degrees and types of openness. The three frameworks address this issue and add substance to the open innovation system model, addressing widespread criticism that it is underdeveloped. The novelty of our model is in the combination of the three frameworks to explore the system. These frameworks promise new insights into system dynamics and facilitate the development of new methods to optimise the diffusion of innovation. Practical Implications: The framework will help to reveal gaps in knowledge flows that impede the uptake of innovations. In the past, identifying these gaps has been difficult given the lack of nuance in existing theory. The knowledge maps proposed will enable informed policy advice to effectively harness the power of knowledge networks, increase innovation diffusion and improve the performance of infrastructure projects. The models developed in this paper will be used in planned empirical research into innovation on large scale infrastructure projects in the Australian built environment.

The determinants of multinational contractors' willingness to bid for Australian public sector major infrastructure projects : towards deploying the eclectic paradigm of internationalisation

Against a background of already thin markets in some sectors of major public sector infrastructure in Australia and the desire of Australian federal government to leverage private finance, concerns about ensuring sufficient levels of competition are prompting federal government to seek new sources of in-bound Foreign Direct Income. The aim of this paper is to justify and develop a means to deploying the eclectic paradigm of internationalisation that forms part of an Australian federally funded research project designed to explain the determinants of multinational contractors' willingness to bid for Australian public sector major infrastructure projects. Despite the dominance of the eclectic paradigm as a theory of internationalisation for over two decades, it has seen limited application in terms of multinational construction. It is expected that the research project will be the first empirical study to deploy the eclectic paradigm to inbound FDI to Australia whilst using the dominant economic theories advocated for use within the eclectic paradigm. Furthermore, the research project is anticipated to yield a number of practical benefits. These include estimates of the potential scope to attract more multinational contractors to bid for Australian public sector infrastructure, including the nature and extent to which this scope can be influenced by Australian governments responsible for the delivery of infrastructure. On the other hand, the research is also expected to indicate the extent to which indigenous and other multinational contractors domiciled in Australia are investing in special purpose technology and achieving productivity gains relative to foreign multinational contractors.

Implementing design build project delivery system in Indonesian road infrastructure projects

Design-Build (DB) project delivery systems have increasingly been adopted by many private and public sector organizations worldwide due to its many advantages. However, many Indonesian road infrastructure projects are still delivered using the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) project delivery system. This paper reviews the existing literature to explore factors that can influence the successful implementation of DB project delivery system in Indonesian road infrastructure projects. It founds the lack of clarification in existing legislations as well as the lack of experiences, knowledge and skill as the main obstacles in implementing DB systems in Indonesia. To overcome these obstacles, this paper proposes (1) A relook at existing legislation in term of providing more guidance on determining projects appropriate for the DB, procedures for implementing DB, and the structure of builder entity; (2) To develop the skills and knowledge of DB to all stakeholders through communications, knowledge sharing and training. The outcome of this review can serve as a guide to development a framework for the implementation of the design-build project delivery system in Indonesian road infrastructure projects.