Abstract
Public-private partnerships (PPPs) have proliferated and adapted to public development in recent decades; within it, the value for money (VfM) assessment defines the feasibility of the project procurement model as one of the essential components of PPP. However, evaluating the VfM in PPPs remains problematic. Given concerns about PPP profitability, a more integrated VfM evaluation is urgently needed to manage multiple indicators along the project lifecycle. Building information management (BIM), popular in architecture, engineering, and construction, provides resources that could support the VfM to a great extent. This paper uses a review approach to identify the current issues that are affecting VfM assessments and suggests that BIM, functioning throughout the PPP lifecycle, could support decision-making in VfM processes in order to satisfy service targets.
Highlights
The public-private partnerships (PPP) model has been well-implemented for project concessions by developing countries to replace the traditional procurement model
Reports [5] by the European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC) indicated that the capability and critical drivers of the consultative machinery used in a large number of PPP projects are questionable, lacking reliable information to support value for money (VfM) assessments
The results revealed that the assessment indicators in VfM were aligned with the other key indicators, such as key performance indicators (KPI)
Summary
The public-private partnerships (PPP) model has been well-implemented for project concessions by developing countries to replace the traditional procurement model. PPP remain popular and continue to be implemented into infrastructure project plans [1]. PPP provide the initial life cycle ambitions in a strategic plan when there is substantial concern about the value for money (VfM). Holistic means are required to provide better VfM as a fundamental part of PPP model implementation [2]. The VfM assessment conducted in the initial stages of PPP plays a crucial role in financial evaluation, which informs the decision on whether a PPP model is viable or not. Reports [5] by the European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC) indicated that the capability and critical drivers of the consultative machinery used in a large number of PPP projects are questionable, lacking reliable information to support VfM assessments. The PPP model does not “bring extra money” in many cases and has failed to meet the risk transfer targets in many cases [6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
