EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 66 (2016) MATEC Web Conf., 66 (2016) 00049 References
Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 66, 2016
The 4th International Building Control Conference 2016 (IBCC 2016)
Article Number 00049
Number of page(s) 8
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20166600049
Published online 13 July 2016
  1. NAO. The Performance and Management of Hospital PFI Contracts, 68. (2010). [Google Scholar]
  2. J. Yuan, M. J. Skibniewski, & Q. Li Managing the Performance of Public Private Partnership Projects to Achieve Value for Money: Key Performance Indicators Selection. In International Conference On Multi-National Construction Projects, pp. 1–16 (2008). [Google Scholar]
  3. H. S. H. Robinson, & J. Scott Service Delivery and Performance Monitoring in PFI/PPP Projects. Construction Management and Economics, 27 (2), pp. 181–197 (2009). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. J. Yuan, A. Y. Zeng, M. J. Skibniewski, & Q. Li Selection of Performance Objectives and Key Performance Indicators in Public–Private Partnership Projects to Achieve Value for Money. Construction Management and Economics, 27, pp. 253–270. (2009). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. J. Liu, P. E. D. Love, P. R. Davis, J. Smith, & M. Regan Performance Measurement Framework in PPP Projects. (2013). [Google Scholar]
  6. J. Liu, P. E. D. D. Love, J. Smith, M. Regan, & E. Palaneeswaran Review of Performance Measurement: Implications for Public–Private Partnerships. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 5 (1), pp. 35–51. (2015). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. M. Regan, J. Smith, & P. E. D. Love Impact of The Capital Market Collapse on Public Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137 (1), pp. 6–16. (2011). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. G. Hodge The Risky Business Of Public – Private Partnerships. Symposium, 63 (December), pp. 37–49. (2004). [Google Scholar]
  9. H K. Yong Public-Private Partnerships Policy and Practice, London: C. Secretariat. (2010). [Google Scholar]
  10. VAGO. Report of the Auditor-General on the Finances of the State of Victoria, 2001–2002, (2002). [Google Scholar]
  11. House of Commons. The Operational Performance of PFI Prisons: Forty-ninth Report of Session 2002-2003. (2003). [Google Scholar]
  12. G. Mladenovic, N. Vajdic, & B. Wu Use of Key Performance Indicators for PPP Transport Projects to Meet Stakeholders’ Performance Objectives. (2013). [Google Scholar]
  13. L. O. Oyedele Avoiding Performance Failure Payment Deductions in PFI/PPP Projects: A Model of Critical Success Factors. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, (JUNE), 259. (2013). [Google Scholar]
  14. M. a., El-Haram & A. Agapiou The Role of the Facility Manager in New Procurement Routes. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 8 (2), pp. 124–134. (2002). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. NAO. The Operational Performance of PFI Prisons, (June), 55. (2003). [Google Scholar]
  16. S. Ismail, & K. A. Rashid Private Finance Initiative (PFI) In Malaysia: The Need for and Issues Related to the Public Sector Comparator (PSC). (2007). [Google Scholar]
  17. R. Jayaseelan, & M. Tan PFI-cure for All Ills. The Egde Malaysia, pp. 72–74. (2006). [Google Scholar]
  18. I.R. Endut Framework For Minimizing Time Overruns of Malaysia Construction Projects. A PhD Thesis, Glasgow Caledonian University. (2008). [Google Scholar]
  19. A. Netto Malaysia’s New Fangled Privatization Fudge. EPU. (2006). [Google Scholar]
  20. Economic Planning Unit (EPU). Streamlining Privatization. Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010, pp. 223–233. (2006). [Google Scholar]
  21. Economic Planning Unit (EPU). The Tenth Malaysian Plan, 2011-2015, Prime Minister‟s Department, Putrajaya. (2010). [Google Scholar]
  22. PEMANDU. Annual Report: Economic Transformation Programme (ETP), Kuala Lumpur: PEMANDU. (2011). [Google Scholar]
  23. Prime Minister Department. Public Private Partnership (PPP) Guideline, pp. 1–12. (2009). [Google Scholar]
  24. S. S. Khaderi, & a. R. a. Aziz Adoption of Private Finance Initiative (PFI) in Malaysian Public Works Projects: Are We Ready ? CIB TG72 World Building Congress, pp. 105–120. (2010). [Google Scholar]
  25. K. Ismail A Value for Money Assessment Framework for Public Private Partnership Approach, PhD, Thesis. (2012). [Google Scholar]
  26. T. Edge Untested Model for Malaysian Companies. The Edge Malaysia, p. 75. (2006). [Google Scholar]
  27. R. Akbıyıklı Performance Assessment of A Private Finance Initiative Road Project. Transport, 28 (February 2015), pp. 11–24. (2013). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. A. Neely, M. Gregory and K. Platts, Performance Measurement System Design: A Literature Review And Research Agenda, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 1228–1263. (2005). [Google Scholar]
  29. D.O. Ong’olo, Public Private Partnerships (PPP): Practice and Regulatory Policy in Kenya. Paper prepared for the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) on July 7th 2006, Kenya. (2006). [Google Scholar]
  30. European Commission. Guidelines for Successful Public-Private Partnerships, European Commission, Brussels. (2003). [Google Scholar]
  31. D. Grimsey, & M. Lewis Evaluating The Risks Of Public Private Partnerships For Infrastructure Projects. International Journal of Project Management. (2002). [Google Scholar]
  32. L. Zhou, R. Keivani, & E. Kurul Sustainability Performance Measurement Framework for PFI Projects in the UK. (2013). [Google Scholar]
  33. J. Yuan, C. Wang, M. J. Skibniewski, & Q. Li Developing Key Performance Indicators for Public-Private Partnership Projects: Questionnaire Survey and Analysis. Journal of Management in Engineering, 28(3), pp. 252–264. (2012). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. S. Ismail Key Performance Indicator for Private Finance Initiative in Malaysia. PhD Thesis. (2009). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.