Analysis of the risk-sharing ratio in PPP projects based on government minimum revenue guarantees

被引:89
作者
Wang, Yinglin [1 ]
Cui, Peng [2 ]
Liu, Jicai [3 ]
机构
[1] Fujian Agr & Forestry Univ, Sch Transportat & Civil Engn, Dept Civil Engn, 15 Shang Xia Dian Rd, Fuzhou 350002, Fujian, Peoples R China
[2] Southeast Univ, Sch Civil Engn, Dept Construct & Real Estate, 2 Sipailou, Nanjing 210096, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[3] Southwest Jiaotong Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Dept Management Sci & Engn, 111,North Sect 1,2nd Circle Rd, Chengdu 610031, Sichuan, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
PPP projects; Reciprocal preference; Minimum revenue guarantee; Risk sharing ratio; MORAL HAZARD; RECIPROCITY; COOPERATION; INCENTIVES; MOTIVATION; ALLOCATION; TOLL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.01.007
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Public-private partnership (PPP) projects have been widely applied in infrastructure construction. A suitable risk distribution strategy is crucial for promoting negotiations between the government and investors. The government usually provides guarantees to investors to distribute risk. However, an excessive guarantee increases the government's financial burden, whereas an insufficient guarantee reduces the confidence of the investors participating in the project. In a minimum revenue guarantee (MRG), the government subsidizes the investors the difference between the actual revenue and the government guarantee line if there is a loss. In PPP power plant and highway projects, investors' revenues come from two sources: government guarantees and the project company's self-sale. To support project companies and to optimize the projects' benefits, the government should set a reasonable benchmark for purchase amounts. Based on the traditional principal-agent model, this paper introduces the reciprocal preference theory to analyze the risk-sharing ratio most suitable for the government. Then, an optimal incentive mechanism is established to guarantee the project's income. The results indicate that by setting a different guarantee strategy for different participants, the government can utilize reciprocal preference to incentivize investors to exert more effort during a partnership and avoid moral hazard. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd, APM and IPMA. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:899 / 909
页数:11
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   Relative performance or team evaluation? Optimal contracts for other-regarding agents [J].
Bartling, Bjoern .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2011, 79 (03) :183-193
[2]   Cooperation and noise in public goods experiments: applying the contribution function approach [J].
Brandts, J ;
Schram, A .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2001, 79 (02) :399-427
[3]  
Chang C.-Y., 2013, J CONSTRUCTION ENG M, V140, P1
[4]   Valuing governmental support in infrastructure projects as real options using Monte Carlo simulation [J].
Cheah, Charles Y. J. ;
Liu, Jicai .
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMICS, 2006, 24 (05) :545-554
[5]   Cooperation among Norway Rats: The Importance of Visual Cues for Reciprocal Cooperation, and the Role of Coercion [J].
Dolivo, Vassilissa ;
Taborsky, Michael .
ETHOLOGY, 2015, 121 (11) :1071-1080
[6]  
Dur R., 2010, Journal of Socio-Economics, V39, P55, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.SOCEC.2009.07.011
[7]   Altruism and Relational Incentives in the Workplace [J].
Dur, Robert ;
Tichem, Jan .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, 2015, 24 (03) :485-500
[8]   Incentives, reputation and the allocation of authority [J].
Englmaier, Florian ;
Filipi, Ales ;
Singh, Ravi .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2010, 76 (02) :413-427
[9]   Psychological foundations of incentives [J].
Fehr, E ;
Falk, A .
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2002, 46 (4-5) :687-724
[10]   Are people conditionally cooperative?: Evidence from a public goods experiment [J].
Fischbacher, U ;
Gächter, S ;
Fehr, E .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2001, 71 (03) :397-404