The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The allocation of risk in PPP/PFI construction projects in the UK
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Public/private partnership (PPP) procurement is seen as an effective way to achieve value for money (VFM) in public infrastructure projects. The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) in the UK is a form of PPP that seeks to combine the advantages of competitive tender and flexible negotiation, and transfer risk away from the public sector. The final risk allocation agreement is reached along with overall contract agreement. It is important for the public client and the private bidders to assess all the potential risks through the whole project life. A questionnaire survey was conducted to explore preferences in risk allocation. Analysis of the response data shows that some risks should still be retained within the public sector or shared with the private sector. These are mainly macro and micro level risks. The majority of risks in PPP/PFI projects, especially those in the meso level risk group, should be allocated to the private sector. However, there are a few risks where unilateral allocation is not always obvious. The research findings should enable public sector clients to establish more efficient risk allocation frameworks in the early stages of project development.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Raji, I. D., Smart, A., White, R. N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T., Hutchinson, B., Smith-Loud, J., Theron, D., & Barnes, P. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3351095.3372873 · Cited by 2,245
Osei-Kyei, R., & Chan, A. P. C. (2015) · International Journal of Project Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.02.008 · Cited by 803
Raji, I. D., Smart, A., White, R. N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T., Hutchinson, B., Smith-Loud, J., Theron, D., & Barnes, P. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.00973 · Cited by 179
Chileshe, N., Rameezdeen, R., Hosseini, M. R., Martek, I., Li, H. X., & Panjehbashi-Aghdam, P. (2018) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2018.07.013 · Cited by 144
Effect of lean tools to control external environment risks of construction projects
Ansah, R. H., & Sorooshian, S. (2017) · Sustainable Cities and Society · doi:10.1016/j.scs.2017.03.027 · Cited by 92
Metadata
- Authors
- Bing, L., Akintoye, A., Edwards, P. J., & Hardcastle, C.
- Venue
- International Journal of Project Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-35
- ISSN
- 0263-7863 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2076256957
- Cited by
- 901
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 34.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The allocation of risk in PPP/PFI construction projects in the UK. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.04.006
- The paper
- Bing, L., Akintoye, A., Edwards, P. J., & Hardcastle, C. (2005). The allocation of risk in PPP/PFI construction projects in the UK. International Journal of Project Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.04.006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
