Internationally, road authorities are becoming more of asset managers. As a result, road project delivery is enabling more integrated services, requiring broader know-how from service providers. Activities previously procured through several agreements may now be included under one inclusive agreement. The client's decision between traditional or more integrated project delivery is fundamental in setting up the framework for design, construction and maintenance, and for their management. The selected contract type should develop a cooperative relationship between the client and implementers, and provide incentives to the parties to achieve client objectives. Clients should define the best ways to procure roads based on project size, complexity, risks, timing, external factors, environmental issues, etc. To assist in the strategic selection of the most efficient project delivery methods, this research determined the performance of the following methods: Design-Bid-Build, Construction Management (with some reserve), Design-Build, and Design-Build-Maintain (covering variations like DBOM, DBFO, BOOT, etc.). The concept of economic efficiency was developed to describe the performance level of the different project delivery methods. Economic efficiency is determined as the ratio of value generation to cost performance. The more value the project delivery system generates at a certain project cost, the more economically efficient way it is to procure roads. The current performance of the project delivery methods was assessed based on the data provided by the interviewees in five countries (Finland, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and USA) and on an extensive literature review. The future performance potential of the methods was determined based on the development potential derived from the data gathered. The analysis performed shows that the current economic efficiency of CM seems to be only slightly higher than that of DBB, while the economic efficiency of DB is significantly higher. DBM brings even more notable improvements as it doubles the efficiency improvement of DB. When development potentials of the project delivery methods are taken into consideration, the difference between traditional and more integrated project delivery methods only increases. Thus, DBB and CM will improve only marginally from the current situation, but both DB and DBM can improve notably their cost performance and value generation resulting in economically even more efficient project delivery. Also the changes expected in the operating environment will favour use of DB and DBM. Thus, it seems that the broader and more integrated service packages (DB and DBM) can provide better value for money and meet the needs and desires of the client better than DBB or CM. However, the full performance potential of each project delivery method can only be achieved provided that some improvements to the system are made. Each project delivery method has its weaknesses that currently hinder optimal performance. It must also be taken into consideration that each method should be applied only in appropriate circumstances, which leaves room for DBB and CM. It is often still appropriate to use DBB, when projects are relatively small, simple, have well-defined end results, and offer no opportunities to innovate or to generate revenue. CM will retain its potential for big projects that are implemented under very restricted conditions or require flexibility to accommodate client changes. As DBM may be used in some, exceptionally large projects, this leaves DB as the normal alternative to DBB. When adopting DB and/or DBM-type project delivery, public owners need to provide permanent market demand for competent contractors to fully capitalise on the potential of these methods. Changes should be made step-wise to allow the participants time to adapt to the new operating environment. Also, training of public sector representatives should improve successes in procurement, as better procurement skills lead to lower transaction costs, better value for money in projects, and faster delivery of public services. At the same time, private companies need to concentrate on relationship building and networking to enable more efficient cooperation over the whole project life and more successful outcomes with higher profitability.