Deciphering the difference puzzle of risk-sharing: A comparative analysis of infrastructure PPP development within China and US

Yongchao Cao , Huimin Li , Limin Su , Wenjuan Zhang , Chengyi Zhang
{"title":"Deciphering the difference puzzle of risk-sharing: A comparative analysis of infrastructure PPP development within China and US","authors":"Yongchao Cao ,&nbsp;Huimin Li ,&nbsp;Limin Su ,&nbsp;Wenjuan Zhang ,&nbsp;Chengyi Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.plas.2024.100135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Appropriate risk sharing is crucial for the successful implementation of Public-Private Partnership projects. However, under different social systems, the international community lacks a clear risk-sharing framework in Public-Private Partnership research. This study employs a multi-case study method to examine the practice of risk sharing in infrastructure Public-Private Partnership projects within China and the US, aiming to provide a clear risk management framework for Public-Private Partnership projects. The research findings reveal common elements and similar characteristics in risk-sharing practices. Contrary to the goal of transferring all risks to the private sector, both countries actually allocate risks to the party with stronger risk control capabilities or share risks between the government and the private sector. The US benefits from more mature policies and has a comprehensive Public-Private Partnership model implementation framework; in contrast, as an emerging market for Public-Private Partnership models, China's current laws and regulations need further improvement. The results of this study not only contribute to optimizing risk-sharing arrangements and improving investment efficiency of the project, but also promote the development of cross-border infrastructure projects, and provide valuable experience and insights for the sustainable development of global infrastructure.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101050,"journal":{"name":"Project Leadership and Society","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100135"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666721524000206/pdfft?md5=1245c4078a8d3b1ce29babde719671e6&pid=1-s2.0-S2666721524000206-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Project Leadership and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666721524000206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Appropriate risk sharing is crucial for the successful implementation of Public-Private Partnership projects. However, under different social systems, the international community lacks a clear risk-sharing framework in Public-Private Partnership research. This study employs a multi-case study method to examine the practice of risk sharing in infrastructure Public-Private Partnership projects within China and the US, aiming to provide a clear risk management framework for Public-Private Partnership projects. The research findings reveal common elements and similar characteristics in risk-sharing practices. Contrary to the goal of transferring all risks to the private sector, both countries actually allocate risks to the party with stronger risk control capabilities or share risks between the government and the private sector. The US benefits from more mature policies and has a comprehensive Public-Private Partnership model implementation framework; in contrast, as an emerging market for Public-Private Partnership models, China's current laws and regulations need further improvement. The results of this study not only contribute to optimizing risk-sharing arrangements and improving investment efficiency of the project, but also promote the development of cross-border infrastructure projects, and provide valuable experience and insights for the sustainable development of global infrastructure.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
破解风险分担的差异难题:中美基础设施 PPP 发展比较分析
适当的风险分担对于成功实施公私合作伙伴关系项目至关重要。然而,在不同的社会制度下,国际社会在公私合作研究中缺乏明确的风险分担框架。本研究采用多案例研究方法,考察了中美两国基础设施公私合作项目中的风险分担实践,旨在为公私合作项目提供一个清晰的风险管理框架。研究结果揭示了风险分担实践中的共同要素和相似特征。与将所有风险转移给私营部门的目标相反,两国实际上都是将风险分配给风险控制能力更强的一方,或者由政府和私营部门共同分担风险。美国得益于较为成熟的政策,拥有完善的公私合作模式实施框架;相比之下,中国作为公私合作模式的新兴市场,现行法律法规有待进一步完善。本研究的成果不仅有助于优化风险分担安排,提高项目投资效率,还能促进跨境基础设施项目的发展,为全球基础设施的可持续发展提供宝贵的经验和启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Making sense of collaboration in major infrastructure construction projects The holistic view in forecasting: A conceptual framework to analyze and mitigate cost underestimation arising from optimism bias Mitigating the negative aspects of project work: The roles of psychological capital and coworker and family support Game research by design in project management and beyond Taking a Selfie: Researcher-practitioner positionality and reflexivity in project scholarship
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1