Content uploaded by Umesha Weerapperuma
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Umesha Weerapperuma on Jul 25, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Thennakoon, T.M.P.N., Jayasena, H.S. and Weerapperuma, U.S., 2023. Investigating the motivation for
implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction industry. In: Sandanayake, Y.G.,
Waidyasekara, K.G.A.S., Ramachandra, T. and Ranadewa, K.A.T.O. (eds). Proceedings of the 11th World
Construction Symposium, 21-22 July 2023, Sri Lanka. [Online]. pp. 606-619. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31705/WCS.2023.50. Available from: https://ciobwcs.com/papers/
606
INVESTIGATING THE MOTIVATION FOR
IMPLEMENTING UNSOLICITED
PROPOSALS IN THE SRI LANKAN
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon
1
, H.S. Jayasena
2
and U.S. Weerapperuma
3
ABSTRACT
Infrastructure development can be identified as a key driver of economic growth. Most
developing countries have prioritised implementing new procurement arrangements to
execute public infrastructure projects throughout their life cycle efficiently. Private
Public Partnership (PPP) procurement arrangement is one of the popular procurement
arrangements, which can be classified as solicited proposals (SPs) and unsolicited
proposals (USPs). Most countries have adopted USP for infrastructure projects among
those two arrangements. Nevertheless, USPs have several drawbacks than SPs, such as
corruption, low social and economic benefits, low value for money, and lack of
transparency. However, governments are still developing their infrastructure projects as
USPs due to the government's motivational aspects towards them. Therefore, it is
controversial how those motivations have a huge impact than drawbacks in
implementing USPs. Thus, this study aims to investigate the motivation for implementing
USPs specific to the Sri Lankan context. Accordingly, a qualitatively based extensive
literature synthesis has been conducted concerning the practices of USPs. Following the
qualitative approach, data were collected through twelve (12) semi-structured
interviews with industry professionals familiar with USPs implementation. The findings
revealed that governments often choose USPs due to limitations in their capacity to
identify and evaluate large-scale projects. These limitations can be financial and
technical, including a lack of expertise. While speculation exists about corrupt practices
associated with unsolicited PPPs, it is difficult to validate such claims. However, it is
acknowledged that unsolicited PPPs, in their current state, offer higher opportunities
for corruption. Nonetheless, accessing private financing quickly and efficiently for PPPs
is also a positive motivation for choosing the unsolicited approach.
Keywords: Governments' Motivation; Procurement; Private Public Partnership (PPP);
Unsolicited Proposals (USP).
1
Undergraduate, Department of Building Economics, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka,
piyuminisansala517@gmail.com
2
Senior Lecturer, Department of Building Economics, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka,
suranga@uom.lk
3
Temporary Lecturer, Department of Building Economics, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka,
umeshas@uom.lk
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 607
1. INTRODUCTION
Construction is a vast, complex, and unique industry, which is a critical economic
regulator of a country (Behm, 2008). It significantly contributes to the national output
(Finkenzeller et al., 2010). Further, the construction sector strongly cooperates with other
key economic regulators (Rameezdeen, 2002). Infrastructure development is vital to
economic well-being and long-term economic growth (Naoum & Egbu, 2015). Therefore,
the success of the construction sector depends on the deliverable quality and efficiency
of the construction projects. The success of a construction project is derived through
fundamental attributes; scope, time, cost, and quality (Ali & Kamaruzzaman, 2010). With
this, selecting a suitable procurement system is a significant step to achieving project
success (Tookey et al., 2001). Naoum and Egbu (2015) stated that the procurement system
is a mechanism for linking and coordinating building team members throughout the
building process in a unique systematic structure, both functionally and contractually.
There are different types of procurement routes, such as separated, integrated,
management-oriented, and collaborative, which can be selected according to their
requirements, and each procurement route has its unique characteristics (Tookey et al.,
2001).
Therefore, most publicly available projects are initiated through various public
procurement mechanisms. Public procurement is implemented under the authority of the
government of a country or any other public sector to focus on stakeholders' satisfaction
with the national development plan (Gunawardana et al., 2021). Further, Capacity
Development Group Bureau (2010) argued that in the global context, public procurement
had been estimated as a 15% contribution to the GDP while it becomes a 70% contribution
to GDP in some developing countries such as Peru, Colombia, India, and the Philippines.
Therefore, enhancing and improving the public procurement process for the nation to
raise the community's standard of living and economic development is beneficial.
Torvinen and Ulkuniemi (2016) argued that publicly available projects possessed
traditional procurement processes in the last few decades. However, the traditional
process has been confronted with intense pressure to alter it due to significant changes in
the public procurement environment. Shortage of funds, limited resources, technical
improvements, and the development of new services can be considered notable drivers
behind new public procurement methods (Jamali, 2007; Krtalić & Kelebuda, 2010;
Pekkarinen et al., 2011). Therefore, procurement practitioners have introduced various
market-based public procurement tools such as public-private partnerships, public finance
initiatives, and pre-commercial procurement options (Raymond, 2008; Torvinen &
Ulkuniemi, 2016; Uyarra & Flanagan, 2009). The key idea behind this closer
collaboration of public procurement methods is that no single party has all the knowledge,
information, resources, or ability to address emerging complex issues (Lawther & Martin,
2005). Then market-based public procurement approaches create chances for both
innovative mobilisation and better achievement of public policy objectives while
delivering services to taxpayers (Liu & Wilkinson, 2011).
Among these innovative public procurement approaches, the most popular model for
purchasing extensive public infrastructure is the public-private partnership (PPP) (Ng et
al., 2013). Instead of relying on one party as in the traditional procurement process,
suppliers and procurers contribute their best skills and knowledge to the project while
involved with planning, financing, maintenance, and assistance services for the procured
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon, H.S. Jayasena and U.S. Weerapperuma
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 608
project (Krtalić & Kelebuda, 2010). Two methods for implementing PPP are Solicited
Proposals (SPs) and Unsolicited Proposals (USPs). The public sector development of the
SPs and the project is required to be implemented as planned by the government with
private sector involvement (Casady & Baxter, 2020; Lenferink et al., 2012; Torvinen &
Ulkuniemi, 2016). When a project is implemented as an unsolicited proposal, a private
entity develops it and proposes it to a relevant authority (Yun et al., 2015; Zhang et al.,
2016). Nyagormey et al. (2020) pointed out that when considering PPP investment in
developing countries, a significant proportion of the investments are acquired by
unsolicited proposals (USPs).
However, there are several barriers that unsolicited PPP projects are faced when
compared with a solicited proposal (Aziz & Nabavi, 2014). USPs are often associated
with some negativities such as corruption, low social and economic benefits, low value
for money, lack of transparency, risk misallocation, lack of competitive tendering process,
nepotism, and lack of fairness (Hodges & Dellacha, 2007; Osei-kyei et al., 2018; PPIAF,
2017; World Bank Group, 2015). Further, USPs initiatives generate unfavourable public
opinions due to their perceived favouritism and lack of competition (Aziz & Nabavi,
2014; Zawawi et al., 2016). Even though USPs have the above major drawbacks, there is
a global tendency and motivation for procuring PPP projects as USPs in developing
countries (Nyagormey et al., 2020; PPIAF, 2017; World Bank Group, 2015). Regarding
the Sri Lankan context, according to the World Bank Group (2020), many public sector
projects are procured through USPs. With this, USPs play a vital role in infrastructure
development in Sri Lanka (Verite, 2021). Then it can be argued that there is a motivation
for the Sri Lankan government also to fulfil the infrastructure implementation through
USPs. Given the paradoxical nature of this motivation, while there are many perceived
drawbacks, this paper aims to identify the motivation factors for developing infrastructure
projects as USPs in the Sri Lankan construction industry. Accordingly, the literature
synthesis has been developed, including PPP practices with USPs, USP drawbacks,
motivation for USPs, and USP practice in the Sri Lankan construction industry.
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research approach can be defined as plans and procedures for conducting research
that covers the progression from general hypotheses to specific techniques for data
collecting, analysis, and interpretation. The qualitative research approach has been used
for this study because it can thoroughly analyse ideas, models, and frameworks with a
theoretical foundation (Creswell, 2014). This paper addressed the research problem:
RQ: "What are the motivations for implementing PPP projects through USPs?"
Exhaustive literature research was conducted by reviewing conference papers, journal
articles, e-books, and other publications to access knowledge on USPs. This literature
survey provided limited findings about the unsolicited proposals in Private Public
Partnership (PPP) projects, including major drawbacks and motivation to adopt USPs.
Thus, there is a knowledge gap in comprehensively identifying the motivation factors for
the Sri Lankan context. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to collect qualitative
data on practitioners' lived experiences, observations, and opinions on the contexts of
USPs. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify the motivation factors of unsolicited
proposals (USPs) in the PPPs of the Sri Lankan construction industry while accounting
for the motivation factors which are identified in the literature review.
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 609
There are no closely defined rules when selecting a sample size for qualitative research
(Baum, 2000; Patton, 2002). However, according to Huberman and Miles (1994),
qualitative research generally relies on small numbers to study in-depth and detailed
detail. Hence, for this study, non-probability snowball sampling was used considering the
limited number of practitioners exposed to USPs and related contexts. Twelve (12)
experts with sound knowledge and experience in USP PPP of the Sri Lankan construction
industry were interviewed. Accordingly, as mentioned above, the initial sample was
limited to interviews of twelve respondents who were saturated after the ninth interview.
Table 1 summarises the profile of the interviewees.
Table 1: Profiles of interviewees
Interviewee code
Profession
Designation
Years of
experiences
R1
PPP Specialist
Chief operating officer
15 years
R2
Quantity Surveying/
Research Scholar
Senior Quantity
Surveyor/Ph.D. Candidate
8 years
R3
PPP Specialist
Chairman
30 years
R4
Procurement Specialist
Resident Engineer
20 years
R5
PPP Specialist
Deputy Director
12 years
R6
PPP Specialist
Deputy Director
6 years
R7
Procurement Specialist
Director
15 years
R8
Resident Engineer
Director
15 years
R9
Engineer
Deputy Director
14 years
R10
Engineer
Project Engineer
13 years
R11
Procurement Specialist
Director
9 years
R12
Engineer
Senior Engineer
10 years
3. PRACTICES OF PPP IN INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT
Because of the recent rapid economic growth, there has been a significant increase in the
demand for infrastructure facilities in developing countries. Then, developing public-
private partnerships (PPPs) is a strategy for enhancing infrastructure facilities in such
countries. As Verma (2010) described in terms of fiscal stabilisation, cash flows, and
efficiency gains, PPPs offer developing countries several benefits and prospects.
Therefore, PPP can be defined as "A method of procurement that brings together the
public and the private sectors in a long-term partnership for mutual benefit. The crucial
feature of a PPP is that it is designed to achieve both social and commercial goals"
(Eisenberg, 2009). The combination of private funding, private project execution, and the
provision of public services and facilities is the essence of public-private cooperation (Liu
& Wilkinson, 2011). There are several PPP project procurement processes across the
globe, including the most common methods such as build-transfer-operate (BTO), build-
transfer-lease (BTL), build-operate-transfer (BOT), building-own-operate (BOO),
design-build-finance-operate (DBFO), design-build-operate-maintain (DBOM) and
many others (Yun et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2016).
Further, in addition to the above common procurement methods, there are two different
approaches named solicited and unsolicited proposals, globally recognised as PPP
projects initiated methods (Zheng & Tiong, 2010). Depending on the decision of who
develops the proposal and implements the project, solicited approach, and unsolicited
approach can be differentiated (Castelblanco & Guevara, 2020b). The public sector does
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon, H.S. Jayasena and U.S. Weerapperuma
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 610
the development of the solicited proposal, and the project is required to be implemented
following an infrastructure development plan of the government but due to the financial
constraints of the government, private sector involvement is vital in this approach (Casady
& Baxter, 2020; Lenferink et al., 2012; Torvinen & Ulkuniemi, 2016). In an unsolicited
approach, a private entity examines and initiates a profitable project as a seeking business
opportunity (Torvinen & Ulkuniemi, 2016). When a project is implemented as an
unsolicited proposal, private entity is involved in developing the proposal, initiating an
implementation plan, and proposing it to a relevant authority (Yun et al., 2015; Zhang et
al., 2016).
4. OVERVIEW OF USP IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
In the USPs, a private firm approaches a public agency with a proposal for an
infrastructure or service project without receiving a direct request or invitation from the
government (Aziz & Nabavi, 2014; PPIAF, 2007; Zawawi et al., 2016). Therefore, a USP
is an exception to the rule in which public sector organisations launch infrastructure
projects. According to PPIAF (2007), the private sector proponent's financial capability
is a vital factor. Then a demonstration of having strong financial strength to undertake the
proposed project is an essential thing that the private proponent should be done when
undertaking the project (PPIAF, 2007). Chew (2015) argued that unsolicited proposals
are considered controversial. This means there are several drawbacks that unsolicited PPP
projects have when compared with a solicited proposal such as corruption, low social and
economic benefits, low value for money, lack of transparency, risk misallocation, lack of
competitive tendering process, nepotism, and lack of fairness (Aziz & Nabavi, 2014).
Then it is crucial to identify the motivation of USPs although there are several drawbacks.
4.1 REVIEW OF THE MOTIVATION OF THE GOVERNMENT FOR
IMPLEMENTING PPPS AS USPS
The growing use of USPs demonstrates that many countries consider implementing PPP
projects using USPs is advantageous and can make an exceptional contribution to the
development of public infrastructure (PPIAF, 2014). When considering the other key
motivation of a government to implement a project as a USP is the lack of financial and
technical capabilities of public sectors to procure, prioritise and identify the projects
(PPIAF, 2017; World Bank Group, 2007). In addition, when implementing a PPP project,
a comprehensive preliminary study should be carried out to ensure the social and
economic viability of the project (Ng et al., 2013). To carry out a proper and accurate
preliminary study, an experienced technical team and considerable financial resource
allocation are needed (Li et al., 2007). Nevertheless, in many public departments of
developing countries, there is a lack of financial resources and expert knowledge in such
studies. Therefore many governments have the motivation to rely on individual private
developers' efforts and initiatives to procure PPP projects (PPIAF, 2014).
Another motivation for a government to select a USP for PPP is that USPs are the quickest
approach to implementing PPP projects compared with a solicited approach (Hodges &
Dellacha, 2007; PPIAF, 2017). Because SPs have to undergo a formal planning
procedure, requested PPP projects, in some solicited projects, excessive competition is
initiated, and considerable time is taken for the procurement process (PPIAF, 2017). Then
many public departments move to direct negotiation instead of a lengthy tendering
process. In USPs, there is only one project proponent, negotiation can be done quickly,
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 611
and the cost incurred for the competitive tendering process is reduced (Osei-kyei et al.,
2018). Moreover, the recurring expenses associated with competitive bidding are
decreased {Formatting Citation}.
PPIAF (2014) emphasised obtaining the private sector's innovative and creative ideas and
using those effectively as another motivating factor in USPs. In essence, unsolicited
proposals allow private investors to develop creative approaches and long-term plans for
infrastructure problems that many public departments are unable to provide (World Bank
Group, 2017). Another well-known reason governments use USPs is the lack of an
appropriate and comprehensive policy framework for PPPs (Hodges & Dellacha, 2007;
PPIAF, 2014). Even though the PPP concept has existed for decades, many nations,
especially those in developing nations, have not yet developed comprehensive policy
guidelines for PPP project execution (Osei-Kyei & Chan, 2017). USPs are frequently used
to carry out PPP projects because there is no detailed regulatory framework (PPIAF,
2012).
Another motivation factor is the government's interest in accessing private entity finance
facilities more quickly than solicited approach. Emphatically, the unsolicited method
helps public institutions tap rapidly into the private sector's money for infrastructure
projects (PPIAF, 2012). Although governments could obtain private financing through
the requested ways, this method occasionally requires more time. Nevertheless, with the
unsolicited approach, the private sector proposes the project with its resources and capital
readily accessible for development (PPIAF, 2009). However, David-Barret and Fazekas
(2020) stated that the government's motivation in most developing countries to implement
a project through USP is the possibility of engaging with some corrupt practices, and the
absence of competitive bidding in USPs leads to government officials engaging with
some fraudulent practices.
Accordingly, Table 2 presents the motivation for implementing USPs for construction
projects, which were collected through past studies.
Table 2: Motivations of implementing USPs.
Motivation
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
Lack of financial and technical capabilities
of public sectors to procure, prioritise and
identify the projects
Lack of financial resources and expert
knowledge in the public sector to carry out a
proper and accurate preliminary study and
governments tend to rely on individual
private developers' efforts and initiatives to
procure PPP projects through USPs.
Project procured unsolicited is considered
the quickest approach to implementing PPP
projects compared with a solicited approach
Obtaining the private sector's innovative and
creative ideas from unsolicited proposals
than solicited proposals
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon, H.S. Jayasena and U.S. Weerapperuma
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 612
Motivation
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
Government's interest to access private
entity finance facilities more quickly than
solicited approach
Absence of a proper regulatory framework
to manage the USPs
Corrupt practices and the absence of
competitive bidding in USPs
Sources: [1] PPIAF, 2014; [2] PPIAF, 2009; [3] Castelblanco & Guevara, 2022; [4] Osei-Kyei & Chan,
2017; [7] Osei-kyei et al., 2018; [8] Verma, 2010; [9] Hodges & Dellacha, 2007; [10] World Bank Group,
2007.
4.2 USP PRACTICES IN THE SRI LANKAN CONTEXT
According to the World Bank Group (2020), many public sector projects are procured
through unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan context. Between 2010 and 2016, the
government spent 6%-7% of the GDP on public investment (Department of national
planning, 2010). Besides, due to the critical economic situation in the country, finding
finances through foreign funding sources has become popular (World Bank Group, 2020).
Then unsolicited proposal plays a vital role in infrastructure development in the Sri
Lankan construction industry (Verite, 2021). Verite (2022) stated that one of the apparent
motivations for implementing PPPs through USPs is the lack of necessary finance to fund
infrastructure projects in Sri Lanka. With this, it is important to identify the other
motivation factors prevailing in the Sri Lankan context to implement USPs as a suitable
PPP method.
5. RESEARCH FINDINGS
Data collected were the opinions of the experts on the generic factors which were
identified related to USPs. The collected data were analysed through manual content
analysis. Consequently, findings through the conducted expert interviews have been
discussed as follows.
5.1 MOTIVATION FOR THE SRI LANKAN GOVERNMENT YO IMPLEMENT PPP
PROJECTS AS USPS
All the motivation factors identified in the literature review were checked with the
respondents' opinions. All the respondents were asked whether that identified motivation
factor in the literature review is valid for the Sri Lankan context. The respondents were
asked to give additional motivation factors they have experienced or known.
Consequently, two additional motivation factors were identified by the respondents.
Further, their experiences with each motivation factor were analysed. Table 3 illustrates
the findings through expert interviews.
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 613
Table 3: Motivation factors for USPs
Motivation Factors
Experts
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R
10
R
11
R
12
Lack of financial and technical
capabilities of public sectors to
procure, prioritise and identify
the projects
Lack of financial resources and
expert knowledge in the public
sector to carry out a proper and
accurate preliminary study
Project procured unsolicited is
considered the quickest approach
to implementing PPP projects
compared with a solicited
approach
Obtaining the private sector's
innovative and creative ideas
from unsolicited proposals than
solicited proposals
Government's interest to access
private entity finance facilities
more quickly than solicited
approach
Corrupt practices and the absence
of a competitive bidding process
in USPs
Absence of a proper and
comprehensive regulatory
framework to manage PPPs
Lack of developers' interest in
developing a project in remote
areas
R1, R2, R4, R10, R11, and R12 elaborated that the lack of financial capabilities is obvious
in a country like Sri Lanka. They highlighted that most of the time public sector still uses
traditional methods compared to the private sector. However, R1, R7, and R8 expressed
that even though lack of financial capability is one of the motivation factors to allow USPs
for PPPs, lack of technical capability is not a motivation because experts who have
technical capabilities are available within the country and by having proper national
policy output of the national policy can be enhanced. Accordingly, all the respondents
have highlighted that financial incapability within the country is a motivation to allow
USPs. However, regarding technical incapability, more than half of the respondents
disagreed with technical incapability and mentioned policy directives that are needed for
technical capabilities.
When considering the public sector's lack of financial resources and expert knowledge to
carry out a proper and accurate preliminary study, R2 stated that the ability to take a risk
regarding preliminary investigation, market survey, or feasibility study is inadequate in
the public sector. Nevertheless, the private sector takes the risk and takes the proposal.
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon, H.S. Jayasena and U.S. Weerapperuma
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 614
R1, R6, R10, R11, and R12 elaborated on the same idea. However, R8 expressed that
when it comes to expert knowledge, the government has enough expert knowledge to
carry out the proper preliminary study. R2, R3, R4, R5, R7, and R9 expressed similar
opinions. Therefore, even though all the respondents agreed with the lack of financial
resources to conduct the preliminary study, the lack of expert knowledge is not agreed.
Project procuring as USP is the quickest approach to implementing PPP projects
compared with a SP. R1 expressed that a lengthy procedure is not there and no need to
conduct a feasibility study, pre-feasibility study, and market survey by the public sector
because the project proponent has done it on their own and brought it with the proposal.
R2 expressed that a tendering procedure should be conducted in solicited proposals where
the employer's requirements need to be finalised. However, for USPs, all these are
shortened. Hence, there is a motivation to start the project within a shorter period.
However, R5 stated that in the SL context, a solicited proposal is selected after a proper
competitive process, and obtaining approval for the project becomes easier than USPs.
All the respondents agreed with the motivation factor that USPs can obtain creative and
innovative ideas from the private sector. R7 expressed that flexibility is higher than
solicited proposals because there is no need of follows donors' framework. Therefore, all
the respondents have highlighted through USPs can be assessed the creative and
innovative ideas of the private sector.
Motivation factor which is the government's interest to access private entity finance
facilities more quickly than solicited approach is agreed by most of the respondents. R1
expressed that if an emergency infrastructure requirement occurs, such as power-
generated infrastructures, the quickest and most straightforward approach to financially
facilitate such type of project is implementing the project as a USP. Most respondents
elaborated on the same idea. However, R6 had different opinions. R6 highlighted that if
a proper competitive bidding process is implemented and can be assessed to the
government finance facility quickly at a lower cost, it will not motivate a government to
allow USPs.
All the respondents highly agreed with the motivation factor of potentially corrupt
practices and the absence of a competitive bidding process in USPs. R7 expressed that
most developing countries like Sri Lanka use these USPs as a corrupt practice because of
less competitive bidding. R2 stated that after 2010 most of the development projects taken
as USPs led to serious concerns of corrupt practices and government assets could have
been used very corruptly. R2 continued to explain that USPs are now limited due to fear
of such corruption. All other respondents elaborated on the same idea. According to them,
without assessing the true value of USPs, government decision-makers may rely on this
motivation factor.
When considering the absence of a proper and comprehensive regulatory framework to
manage PPPs as a motivation factor, all the respondents agreed with that motivation
factor. Moreover, R8 explained that although the PPP concept existed within Sri Lanka
in the last few decades, the Sri Lankan government has not had proper and matured policy
guidelines for PPP projects with proper paths and timelines. Further, R6 explained that as
a country, there is an absence of a strategic approach, policy, vision, or proper process to
use our resources under the PPP modality; the government becomes market-given and
responds to the proposals not initiated by the government side. All other respondents
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 615
highlighted the same idea. Therefore, this motivation factor usually prevails in a
developing country like Sri Lanka.
Besides the findings in the literature review, R8 identified the motivation as an additional
motivational factor: the lack of developers' interest in developing a project in remote
areas. All the interviewees interviewed after R8 was asked about this motivation factor.
R8 stated that if a project in a remote area is implemented as a solicited proposal and there
is a lack of interest among the competitors, it is better to implement it as an unsolicited
proposal for such type of project. R9 and R12 highlighted the same idea.
6. DISCUSSION
As discussed, several motivation factors are affected by the decision of the government
to implement USPs for PPP projects. The government believes implementing PPP
projects as USPs provides benefits and uniquely contributes to public sector infrastructure
development (PPIAF, 2012). Therefore, these governments' motivation encourages and
allow the PPP projects as USPs to solve the infrastructure concerns within the country
quickly and address the gaps of the publicly initiated projects. These institutional
motivations are formally acknowledged by governments or included in USP frameworks.
When a government is required to manage USPs, it is important to identify the motivation
factors related to their own country (World Bank Group, 2017).
One of the significant motivation factors identified in the literature review and the
respondents' opinions is the capacity constraints of the public sector. Nevertheless, some
respondents disagreed with such motivation. USPs are not always a practical way to get
around capacity issues. Government institutions should look at the condition of
implementing a project as a USP. It is equally challenging or more challenging than
developing the project as a publicly initiated project through a competitive process.
According to Kim et al. (2011), due to information gaps between the public agency and
the USP proponent regarding the project's specifics, such as scope, design, construction,
and operation, after implementing the project public sector finds it more difficult to shape
the project actively. In addition, it becomes more challenging for the public entity to
structure the contract and implement the project with the required value for money.
Therefore, when relying on the capacity constraints motivation factor, it is necessary to
identify whether it is more challenging or equally challenging than the publicly initiated
projects.
Another significant motivation factor that most respondents agreed with is the fast project
implementation through USPs. Nevertheless, some experts rejected the idea that a USP
can speed up project execution, for sole-sourcing or direct negotiation. Due to USPs
bypassing the public-procurement regulations may lead to public controversies and cause
further delays in the projects, then although the project is going faster at an early stage, at
a later stage, it takes a longer time (Brocklebank, 2014). Further, due to direct negotiation
of the USPs, time delays occurred later. When a government relies on this motivation
factor, it is necessary to identify the delays that can occur later and evaluate if it gains
more benefits than publicly initiated projects. Otherwise, this is not a motivation factor to
be relied on by the government.
Opportunities for corrupt practices are often attributed to USPs (Hodges & Dellacha,
2007). The study showed such perception among the participants. While this does not
confirm the existence, this highlights the significance of potential corruption when public
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon, H.S. Jayasena and U.S. Weerapperuma
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 616
projects are implemented with USPs. Consequently, corrupt practices become a likely
candidate for motivation to use USPs given the background context of the country.
7. CONCLUSIONS
While USPs have various drawbacks, motivational factors stimulate the industry to adopt
PPP projects as USPs. This tendency to implement PPP projects as USPs can also be seen
in the Sri Lankan construction industry, as a significant number of USPs have been
implemented in the country during the last few decades. Simultaneously, controversial
problems such as low social and economic benefits, low value for money, high transaction
costs, and corruption are thought to have been created through these projects.
Nevertheless, still, USPs are in practice. With the curiosity on why such motivation could
exist, this study examined the motivation for adopting USPs for PPP projects in Sri Lanka.
The finding revealed the underlying motivation behind governments' tendency to
implement unsolicited PPPs, notwithstanding their potential contentiousness. One key
motivation to opt for unsolicited mode is the capacity limitations in the public sector to
identify and evaluate large-scale projects. Capacity limitations can be financial and
technical, including limited government expertise. In case these limitations are not true,
a lack of government policies and/or strategies to mobilize the capacity could at least be
absent. Speculations were evident that USPs are preferred due to their opening for corrupt
practices and absence of competition. Sensitive and controversial assertions like this are
difficult to be validated. Notwithstanding the question of whether corruption occurs, it is
understood that USPs in their current state provide relatively higher corruption
opportunities. However, it is observed that corrupt practices need not be the only
motivation if they exist; there are also positive motivations, such as accessing private
entity finance facilities more quickly for PPP than the solicited approach.
The main limitation of this study is that it merely examined and considered broad
justifications for using unsolicited PPP proposals rather than thoroughly examining and
considering the inherent characteristics of justifications (i.e., push and pull theories). Now
that the generic motivations are identified through this study, these findings help to
embark on the next level of the study. Future research should be focused on the "pull and
push" factors that influence the adoption of unsolicited PPPs in a particular nation or
region. Moreover, future studies will also investigate the drivers behind the private
sector's interest in USP agreements.
8. REFERENCES
Abdel Aziz, A., & Nabavi, H. (2014). Unsolicited proposals for PPP projects: Private sector perceptions in
the USA. Construction Research Congress 2014: 2(2), pp.1349-1358.
Ali, A. S., & Kamaruzzaman, S. N. (2010). Cost performance for building construction projects in klang
valley. Journal of Building Performance, 1(1), pp.110-118.
Baum, F. (2000), The New Public Health, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Behm, M. (2008). Construction Sector. Journal of Safety Research, 39(2), pp.175-178.
Brocklebank, P. (2014, December). Private sector involvement in road financing (SSATP Africa Transport
Policy Program Working Paper No. 102).
https://www.ssatp.org/sites/ssatp/files/publications/SSATPWP102-PPP.pdf
Capacity Development Group Bureau. (2010). Public procurement capacity development guide.
Procurement Capacity Development Centre. https://www.unpcdc.org
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 617
Casady, C. B., & Baxter, D. (2020). Pandemics, public-private partnerships (PPPs), and force majeure |
COVID-19 expectations and implications. Construction Management and Economics. 38(12). pp.1077-
1085.
Castelblanco, G., & Guevara, J. (2022) In the name of the pandemic: A case study of contractual
modifications in PPP solicited and unsolicited proposals in COVID-19 times . In Jazizadeh, F., Shealy,
T., & Garvin, M. J. (Eds.), Construction Research Congress 2022, Arlington, Virginia, 9-12 March
2022. pp.50-58. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Castelblanco, G., & Guevara, J. (2020). Risk allocation in ppp unsolicited and solicited proposals in Latin
America: Pilot study in Colombia. In Grau, D., Tang, P., & Asmar, M. E.(Eds.), Construction Research
Congress 2020, Tempe, Arisona. pp.1321-1329. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Chew, A. (2015). Use of unsolicited proposals for new projects-the approaches in Australia. European
Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, 10(1), pp.29-34.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage
Publications.
David-Barret, E., & Fazekas, M. (2020). Grand corruption and government change: An analysis of partisan
favoritism in public procurement. European Journal on Criminal Policy & Research, 26(1), pp.411-
430.
Department of national planning. (2010). Implementation of the national physical planning policy and plan
implementation of the national physical planning policy and plan Sri Lanka 2010-2030 project
proposals national physical planning department (issue april).
Eisenberg, T. (2009). US chamber of commerce liability survey: Inaccurate, unfair, and bad for business.
Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 6(4), pp.969-1002.
Finkenzeller, K., Dechant, T., & Schäfers, W. (2010). Infrastructure: A new dimension of real estate? An
asset allocation analysis. Journal of Property Investment and Finance, 28(4), pp.263-274.
Gunawardana, K. A. P., Sandanayake, Y. G., Karunasena, G. I., & Jayawickrama, T. S. (2021). Problems
and related causes of public procurement process to achieve sustainability in developing countries. In:
Sandanayake, Y.G., Gunatilake, S. and Waidyasekara, K.G.A.S. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 9th World
Construction Symposium, 9-10 July 2021, Sri Lanka. pp.458-470.
Hodges, J. T., & Dellacha, G. (2007). Unsolicited infrastructure proposals: How some countries introduce
competition and transparency. Public-private infrastructure advisory facility.
Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). An Expanded Source Book: Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.).
SAGE Publications.
Jamali, D. (2007). A study of customer satisfaction in the context of a public-private partnership.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 24(4), pp.370-385.
Kim, J., Kim, J., Shin, S., & Lee, S. (2011). Public-private partnership infrastructure projects: Case Studies
from the Republic of Korea. Asian Development Bank.
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/29032/ppp-kor-v1.pdf
Krtalić, S., & Kelebuda, M. (2010). The role of the public-private partnership in providing of public goods:
Possibilities and constraints. Conference Proceedings: International Conference of the Faculty of
Economics Sarajevo (ICES), pp.1-19.
Lawther, W. C., & Martin, L. L. (2005). Innovative practices in public procurement partnerships: The case
of the United States. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 11(5-6), pp.212-220.
Lenferink, S., Leendertse, W., & Arts, J. (2012). Public–private plan development : Can early private
involvement strengthen infrastructure planning ?. European Planning Studies, 22(1), pp.37-41.
Li, B., Akintoye, A., Corresponding, P. J. E., Hardcastle, C., Li, B., Akintoye, A., Corresponding, P. J. E.,
,,, & Hardcastle, C. (2007). Critical success factors for PPP / PFI projects in the UK construction
industry. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 3(5), pp. 61-93.
Liu, T., & Wilkinson, S. (2011). Adopting innovative procurement techniques obstacles and drivers for
adopting public-private partnerships in New Zealand. Journal of Construction Innovation, 11(4),
pp.452-469.
Naoum, S., & Egbu, C. (2015). A critical review of procurement method research in construction journals.
Journal of Procedia Economics and Finance, 21(5), pp.6-13.
T.M.P.N. Thennakoon, H.S. Jayasena and U.S. Weerapperuma
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 618
Neves, P., & Kim, D. J. (2017). Managing unsolicited proposals in infrastructure: 5 key questions for
governments. World Bank Publication, Available at Http://Blogs. Worldbank. Org/Ppps/Managing-
Unsolicited-Proposals-Infrastructure-5-Key-Questions-Governments.
Ng, S. T., Wong, J. M. W., & Wong, K. K. W. (2013). A public-private people partnerships (P4) process
framework for infrastructure development in Hong Kong. International Journal of Urban Policy and
Planning, 31(4), pp.370-381.
Nyagormey, J. J., Baiden, B. K., Nani, G., Nyagormey, J. J., Baiden, B. K., Nani, G., & Adinyira, E. (2020).
Review on criteria for evaluating unsolicited public–private partnership PPP proposals from 2004 to
2018. International Journal of Construction Management, 5(2), pp.1-15.
Osei-Kyei, R., & Chan, A. P. C. (2017). Implementation constraints in public-private partnership. Journal
of Facilities Management, 15(1), pp.90-106.
Osei-kyei, R., Chan, A. P. C., Dansoh, A., Ofori-kuragu, J. K., & Oppong, G. D. (2018). Strategies for
effective management of unsolicited public – private partnership proposals. Journal of Management in
Engineering,34(3), pp.1-12.
Patton, M.Q. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, (3rd ed.), SAGE Publications
Pekkarinen, S., Hennala, L., Harmaakorpi, V., & Tura, T. (2011). Clashes as the potential for innovation in
public service sector reform. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 24(6), pp.507-532.
PPIAF (2009). Unsolicited proposals module 5: Implementing and monitoring. PPIAF.
https://ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf.org/fles/documents/toolkits/highwaystoolkit/6/pdf-version/5-42.pdf.
PPIAF. (2012). Unsolicited proposals, note 6. PPIAF. www.castalia-advisors.com/files/Note-Six-
Unsolicited-Proposals. pdf.
PPIAF. (2014). Unsolicited proposals – an exception to public initiation of infrastructure PPP. PPIAF.
http://ppp. worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/sites/ppp.worldbank.org/ files/ documents/
PPIAF_ UnsolicitedProposals_EN.pdf.
PPIAF. (2017). Policy guidelines for managing unsolicited proposals in infrastructure projects
infrastructure projects. II. PPIAF. https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/library/policy-
guidelines-managing-unsolicited-proposals-infrastructure-projects-volume-i-volume-ii-and-volume-iii
Rameezdeen, R. (2002). Trends in construction procurement systems in Sri Lanka. Built Environment-Sri
Lanka, 2(2), pp.2-9.
Raymond, J. (2008). Benchmarking in public procurement. An International Journal, 15(6), pp.782-793.
Tookey, J. O. H. N. E., Murray, M., Hardcastle, C., & Langford, D. (2001). Construction procurement
routes: Re‐defining the contours of construction procurement. Journal of Engineering, Construction
and Architectural Management, 8(1), pp.20-30.
Torvinen, H., & Ulkuniemi, P. (2016). End-user engagement within innovative public procurement
practices: A case study on public–private partnership procurement. Journal of Industrial Marketing
Management, 58(1), pp.58-66.
Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2009). Understanding the innovation impacts of public procurement. European
planning studies, 18(1), pp.123-143,
Verite. (2021). Opportunities to Protect Public Interest in Public Infrastructure : Review of Regulatory
Frameworks in Sri Lanka Verite research. https://www.veriteresearch.org/publication/opportunities-to-
protect-public-interest-in-public-infrastructure-feb-2021/
Verite. (2022). The lure of chinese: sri lanka's experiment with a special framework to finance its
infrastructure investments . Verite research. https://www.veriteresearch.org/wp-
content/uploads/2022/08/VR_EN_RR_Aug2022_The-Lure-of-Chinese-Loans.pdf
Verma, S. (2010). Government obligations in public-private partnership contracts. Journal of public
procurement, 10(1), pp.565-590.
World Bank Institute (2014), Public-Private Partnership Reference Guide. World Bank Institute.
https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/library/ppp-reference-guide-3-0-full-version.
World Bank Group. (2017). Guidelines for the development of a policy for managing unsolicited proposals
in infrastructure projects. World Bank Publications. http://pubdocs.
worldbank.org/en/976121488983070966/Guidelines-for-the-Development-of-a-USP-Policy.pdf.
Investigating the motivation for implementing unsolicited proposals in the Sri Lankan construction
industry
Proceedings The 11th World Construction Symposium | July 2023 619
World Bank Group/PPIAF. (2007). Unsolicited infrastructure proposals. World Bank Publications.
https://ppp.worldbank.org/publicprivatepartnership/sites/ppp.worldbank.org/files/documents/Unsolicit
edProposals _Volume2_Guidelines_WEB%20%281%29.pdf
World Bank Group/PPIAF. (2014). Unsolicited proposals – An exception to public initiation of
infrastructure PPPs an analysis of global trends and lessons learned. World Bank Publications.
https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/library/ppiaf-unsolicited-proposals-exception-
public-initiation-infrastructure-ppps-analysis-global-trends-and-lessons-learned
World Bank Group/PPIAF. (2015). Policy guidelines for managing unsolicited proposals in infrastructure
projects proposals in infrastructure projects: vol. iii. World Bank Publications.
https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/library/policy-guidelines-managing-unsolicited-
proposals-infrastructure-projects-volume-i-volume-ii-and-volume-iii.
Yun, S., Jung, W., Han, S. H., & Park, H. (2015). Critical organisational success factors for public private
partnership projects: A comparison of solicited and unsolicited proposals. Journal of Civil Engineering
and Management, 21(2), pp.131-143.
Zawawi, Z., Imran, M., Kulatunga, U., & Thayaparan, M. (2016). Malaysian experience with public-private
partnership (PPP) managing unsolicited proposal. Jornal of Built Environment Project and Asset
Management, 6(5), pp.508-520.
Zhang, S., Chan, A. P. C., Feng, Y., Duan, H., & Ke, Y. (2016). Science direct critical review on PPP
research: A search from the Chinese and international journals. International Journal of Project
Management , 34(4), pp.597-612.
Zheng, S., & L.K.Tiong, R. (2010). First public-private-partnership application in Taiwan' s wastewater
treatment sector : Case study of the Nanzih BOT wastewater treatment project. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management , 9(4), pp.913-922.
