Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Public-private partnership model for transport sector||Authors:||Sreenath, Sreenivasan||Keywords:||DRNTU::Business||Issue Date:||2016||Source:||Sreenath, S. (2016). Public-private partnership model for transport sector. Doctoral thesis, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.||Abstract:||The selection of the right Public- Private Partnership (PPP) model is an important policy decision of Governments during the feasibility phase of the PPP project. This is essential for attracting investors, achieving maximum value for money, timely financial closure and successful completion of the whole life cycle of the asset. This research is focused on road PPP projects under Transport Sector to recommend the right delivery model for Small States whose resources are limited and hence not able to afford any failure which will slow down the economic growth of the country. Presently Governments do not have any quantitative analysis technique to compare various PPP models to make decision on the right PPP model. Governments usually carry out feasibility studies and based on value for money analysis are making policy decision on the selection of PPP model which had led to failure of various PPP projects in most of the countries including mature countries. Hence to deal with the above problem faced by Governments, social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) technique was chosen for analysing and then finding a solution to the problem using the multi-criteria decision aiding method, Novel Approach to Imprecise Assessment and Decision Environments (NAIADE). The advantage of using NAIADE is because it allows working with quantitative and qualitative criteria under uncertainty and imprecision. Another considerable advantage of NAIADE over other multi-criteria methods is it relies in its characteristics of not requiring a prior definition of the weights by the decision maker. NAIADE is able to provide consistent results for the PPP model selection as it also considers the preference of social actors for scenarios and conflicts associated with each alternative. SMCE was considered as in society there are different legitimate values and points of view. This creates social pressure for taking into account various policy dimensions (economic, social and environmental). SMCE ensures transparency, powerful frame work, legitimacy of the decision taken and quality of the evaluation process. For the present research, five alternatives were considered based on case studies to be evaluated under fourteen different criteria, whose values can be exact, stochastic and fuzzy. Based on the analysis BOT (Annuity with viable gap) funding was the right PPP model compared with other alternatives – BOT(Toll), BOT(Toll) with VGF, BOT(Annuity) and BOOT.||URI:||http://hdl.handle.net/10356/68836||Fulltext Permission:||restricted||Fulltext Availability:||With Fulltext|
|Appears in Collections:||CEE Theses|
Items in DR-NTU are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.