Show simple item record

contributor authorTiina Koppinen
contributor authorPertti Lahdenperä
date accessioned2017-05-08T21:21:30Z
date available2017-05-08T21:21:30Z
date copyrightDecember 2007
date issued2007
identifier other%28asce%291076-0342%282007%2913%3A4%28321%29.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/48316
description abstractLately 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.
publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
titleRealized Economic Efficiency of Road Project Delivery Systems
typeJournal Paper
journal volume13
journal issue4
journal titleJournal of Infrastructure Systems
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2007)13:4(321)
treeJournal of Infrastructure Systems:;2007:;Volume ( 013 ):;issue: 004
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record