Project selection index for unsolicited public–private partnership proposals

Robert Osei-Kyei, Albert P.C. Chan, Ayirebi Dansoh

Research output: Journal article publicationJournal articleAcademic researchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)


The careful assessment and evaluation of unsolicited public–private partnership (PPP) proposals prior to their implementation is very critical towards achieving effective outcomes including wider social benefits and value for money. This article aims to develop a pragmatic model (i.e. project selection index) that could be used to quantify the viability levels of unsolicited PPP proposals drawing on a well-defined set of evaluation criteria for unsolicited proposals. A questionnaire survey was conducted with experienced PPP experts and the fuzzy set theory was used to develop the model. The pragmatic model consists of three critical evaluation criteria groupings (CECGs); namely: value for money, financial feasibility and sustainable innovation. Among the three CECGs, value for money has the highest coefficient value of 0.36. The findings of this study will enable contracting authorities to objectively evaluate the viability levels of unsolicited PPP proposals prior to their implementations. In addition, proponents would be informed of the key and strategic areas to consider when preparing their unsolicited PPP proposals. Finally, this study contributes to the on-going international discussion on the effective ways of managing unsolicited PPP proposals.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)555-566
Number of pages12
JournalInternational Journal of Construction Management
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2020


  • Evaluation criteria
  • fuzzy theory
  • project selection index
  • public-private partnership
  • unsolicited proposals

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Building and Construction
  • Strategy and Management
  • Management of Technology and Innovation


Dive into the research topics of 'Project selection index for unsolicited public–private partnership proposals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this