Host governments often provide guarantees in build‐operate‐transfer (BOT) infrastructure projects to attract private sector investors. Problems arise because the governments often do not know the full extent of contingent liabilities when issuing guarantees, and because they account and record guarantee costs only when guarantees come due. This paper discusses the guarantees' financial impact from the perspectives of the government and the project sponsor. A typical Indonesian BOT toll road project is taken as the case study. Stochastic simulation using Latin Hypercube technique is applied on the cash flow model with and without guarantees. Several types of guarantees including minimum revenue guarantee, maximum interest rate guarantee, debt guarantee, tariff guarantee and minimum traffic guarantee are discussed. Simulation results reveal that guarantees can reduce risk but are not free of cost. If compared with equivalent subsidies, however, some guarantees can be more effective in lessening the extent of project risk.
Article navigation
1 December 2004
Case Report|
December 01 2004
Valuing guarantees in a BOT infrastructure project
Andreas Wibowo
Andreas Wibowo
F.G. Bauwirtschaft und Baubetrieb, Institut für Bauingenieurwesen‐TU Berlin, Sekr. TIB 1‐B6 Geb. 13b, Gustav‐Meyer‐Allee 25, Berlin, Germany
Search for other works by this author on:
Publisher: Emerald Publishing
Online ISSN: 1365-232X
Print ISSN: 0969-9988
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2004
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (2004) 11 (6): 395–403.
Citation
Wibowo A (2004), "Valuing guarantees in a BOT infrastructure project". Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 11 No. 6 pp. 395–403, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980410571543
Download citation file:
New and popular articles
Suggested Reading
Team management for fast projects: an empirical study of process industries
International Journal of Operations & Production Management (May,2009)
The need for life‐cycle integration of project processes
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (March,1999)
Performance of mid‐project reviews (MPRs): quantification based on fuzzy recognition
Built Environment Project and Asset Management (November,2011)
Review of CAWS
Structural Survey (April,2005)
Drivers for dynamic brief development in construction
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (August,2004)
Related Chapters
Introduction
NEC4: Effective Preparation and Management of the Construction Programme
Sustainability in Construction Projects
Measures of Sustainable Construction Projects Performance
Strategizing and Project Management in Construction Projects: An Exploratory Literature Review
10th Nordic Conference on Construction Economics and Organization
Recommended for you
These recommendations are informed by your reading behaviors and indicated interests.
