A Structural Equation Model on Critical Risk and Success in Public–Private Partnership: Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In construction, risk is inherent in each project, and success involves meeting defined objectives beyond budget and schedule. Factors vary for infrastructure projects, and their correlation with performance must be studied. In the case of public–private partnership (PPP) transportation, the level of complexity is higher due to more involved parties. Risks and success factors in PPP projects affect each other, which may lead to project failure. Recognizing the critical risk factors (CRFs) and critical success factors (CSFs) is indispensable to ensure the success of PPP infrastructure project implementation. However, the existing research on the PPP risk and success relationship has not gone into sufficient detail, and more support to address the existing gaps in the body of knowledge and literature is necessary. Therefore, in response to the missing area in the public–private partnership transportation industry, this paper analyzed the correlation between PPP risks and success factors. It identified, explored, and categorized various risk and success factors by combining a literature review, expert panel interviews, and a questionnaire survey among both the public and private sectors, a win–win principle. The data collected were analyzed using the structural equation modeling (SEM) approach and relative significance. Results show the relationship between risk and success factors, their influence on PPPs, and the most important factors, known as CRFs and CSFs, with high loading factors (LF > 0.5) and high relative importance (NMS > 0.5). The top five CRFs include “Contract quality (incomplete, conflicting)”, “Staff expertise and experience”, “Financial market risk”, “Conflicting objectives and expectations”, and “Inefficient feasibility study”. The top five CSFs were found as “Appropriate risk allocation and risk-sharing”, “Strong financial capacity and capability of the private sector”, “Government providing guarantees”, “Employment of professional advisors”, and “Realistic assessment of the cost and benefits”. This study advances the understanding of risk and success factors in PPPs and contributes to the theoretical foundations, which will benefit not only public management, policy consultants, and investors but also academics interested in studying PPP transportation projects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".