Realized Economic Efficiency of Road Project Delivery Systems
Publication: Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 13, Issue 4
Abstract
Lately project delivery methods where the implementer offers broader service packages are increasingly used in infrastructure projects worldwide. At the same time, the number of alternative project delivery methods has increased making selection of the best one difficult. The road authority must understand the features of the methods in order to select the most effective ones in terms of economic efficiency. To assist in the selection, this research compared the operating principles and performance of design–bid–build, construction management, design–build (DB), and design–build–maintain (DBM) based on an international interview survey and an extensive literature review. Opinions presented by the interviewees and literature review all pointed to the same direction. Based on the analysis of road procurement, broader service packages give, on average, better value for the money and enable clients to attain their goals better than more traditional methods. DB and DBM seem to outperform more conservative procurement methods both in cost and value generation terms. Each method, however, is particularly suitable for specific projects and should be selected accordingly.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
AECOM Consulting and Science Applications International Corporation (AECOM). (2003). “Design–build effectiveness study—As required by TEA-21 Section 1307(f).” US DOT Advisory Team slides, AECOM, Birmingham, Ala.
Alhazmi, T., and McCaffer, R. (2000). “Project procurement system selection model.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 126(3), 176–184.
Ardani, A., and Jesaitis, P. (1999). “Evaluation of design–build practice in Colorado IR(CX)70-4(143).” Rep. No. CDOT-DTD-R-99-5, Colorado Dept. of Transportation, Denver.
Arditi, D., and Lee, D.-E. (2003). “Assessing corporate service quality performance of design–build contracts using quality function deployment.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 21, 175–185.
Arthur Andersen and Enterprise LSE. (2000). Value for money drivers in the private finance initiative, Treasury Taskforce, London.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2002). “Contract administration: Technology and practice in Europe.” FHwA-PL-03-002, FHwA, Washington, D.C.
Gransberg, D. D., Dillon, W. D., Reynolds, L., and Boyd, J. (1999). “Quantitative analysis of partnered project performance.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 125(3), 161–166.
Konchar, M. D. (1997). “A comparison of United States project delivery systems.” Ph.D., Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa.
Koppinen, T., and Lahdenperä, P. (2004a). “Road sector experiences on project delivery methods.” VTT Research Notes 2260, Espoo, Finland.
Koppinen, T., and Lahdenperä, P. (2004b). “The current and future performance of road project delivery methods.” VTT Publications 549, Espoo, Finland.
Kumaraswamy, M. M., and Dissanayaka, S. M. (1996). “Procurement by objectives.” J. Constr. Procure., 2(2), 38–51.
Kumaraswamy, M. M., and Dissanayaka, S. M. (2001). “Developing a decision support system for building project procurement.” Build. Environ., 36(3), 337–349.
Lahdenperä, P., and Koppinen, T. (2003). “Incentive payment bases for a construction project—Part 1. International state-of-art review.” VTT Research Notes 2191, Espoo, Finland (in Finnish).
Love, E. D. (2002). “Influence of project type and procurement method on rework costs in building construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 128(1), 18–29.
Molenaar, K. R., and Songer, A. D. (1998). “Model for public sector design–build project selection.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 124(6), 467–479.
Molenaar, K. R., Songer, A. D., and Barash, M. (1999). “Public-sector design–build evolution and performance.” J. Manage. Eng., 15(2), 54–62.
National Audit Office (NAO). (2001). “Managing the relationship to secure a successful partnership in PFI projects.” National Audit Office, Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General HC 375, National Audit Office, London.
National Audit Office (NAO). (2003). “PFI: Construction performance.” National Audit Office, Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, HC 371, National Audit Office, London.
Ng, S. T., Luu, D. T., Chen, S. E., and Lam, K. C. (2002). “Fuzzy membership functions of procurement selection criteria.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 20, 285–296.
Palaneeswaran, E. (2000). “Contractor selection systems for design–build projects.” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Pakkala, P. (2002). Innovative project delivery methods for infrastructure. An international perspective, Finnish Road Enterprise, Helsinki, Finland.
Zhang, X. (2006). “Public clients’ best value perspectives of public private partnerships in infrastructure development.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 132(2), 107–114.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 13 • Issue 4 • December 2007
Pages: 321 - 329
Copyright
© 2007 ASCE.
History
Received: Sep 27, 2006
Accepted: Jan 30, 2007
Published online: Dec 1, 2007
Published in print: Dec 2007
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.