[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]ppp投標(biāo)外文翻譯--公私伙伴關(guān)系（ppp）投標(biāo)的物有所值（vfm）評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（英文）

1、See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268064259The evaluation criteria of Value for Money(VFM) of Public Private Partnership (PPP) bidsArticleCITATI

2、ONS6READS6383 authors:Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:Defects Liability Period Management View projectSignificant Sustainable Factors for PFI Projects View projectKhariz

3、am IsmailUniversiti Teknologi MARA3 PUBLICATIONS 18 CITATIONS SEE PROFILERoshana TakimUniversiti Teknologi MARA44 PUBLICATIONS 247 CITATIONS SEE PROFILEAbdul Hadi NawawiUniversiti Teknologi MARA100 PUBLICATIONS

4、 261 CITATIONS SEE PROFILEAll content following this page was uploaded by Abdul Hadi Nawawi on 07 April 2015.The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are adde

5、d to the original documentand are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.350bidders that can significantly contribute VFM to the projects. Zhang (2008) indicates that the mos

6、t important requirement for achieving VFM is the selection of potential bidders in PPP projects. This is vital for the fact that capabilities and reliability of concessionaire is the main focal point to the success of

7、 PPP projects (Zhang, 2008). The concessionaires are responsible to finance, design, long term operation, maintenance and transfer of the project facilities to the government at the end of the concession period. Conces

8、sionaire proficiency depends on the overall resources, capabilities of the constituent companies, ability to formulate competitive financial and technical packages of the proposed projects (Zhang et al. 2002). The prac

9、titioners believed that the right choice of the evaluation criteria that assess the private bids is the core of a successful best value throughout the PPP approach. Generally, to achieve the best VFM, contractor selec

10、tion should consider competitiveness, compliance with client’s requirements, reliability of performance, qualitative superiority and life cycle cost. Literature denotes many criteria in the VFM evaluation process of PP

11、P bids. Ten dominant criteria as agreed by Partnership Colombia (2005); HM Treasury (2006) are financial aspects, innovation; whole life cost; incentive and monitoring; health, safety and environment, appropriate ris

12、k allocation; acquisition of facilities management services, market interest and compliance the specification. Meanwhile, Zhang (2008) classifies the criteria into four essential packages that can effectively measure

13、bidders’ capability. These are: financial package (optimum whole life cost); technical package (innovation of all aspects); safety, health and environmental package and managerial package (risk management, dispute and

14、contractual aspects). Yuan et al. (2009) have drawn 5 different classifications of VFM evaluation criteria that include: (i) Physical characteristic of projects (design, technology, bidders’ knowledge (ii) Financing

15、 (iii) Innovation (iv) Stakeholder’s indicator (client satisfaction) and (v) Process indicator (facilities management, resources utilization, health & environment and time management). The contractor evaluation

16、criteria stated should be appropriately selected, cautiously evaluated by matching the specific client objectives and project requirements. Full evaluation of bids should seek to identify the bid that offers the best c

17、ombination of financial and non financial aspects. Nonetheless, although many researchers have highlighted the aforementioned criteria in VFM evaluation bid, there has been very little explicit consideration of the act

18、ual significant criteria that should be taken on board in evaluation of bids towards VFM. In Malaysia, the implementation and policy of VFM has been the subject of considerable debate and critiques. In spite of

19、the government acknowledgement on the importance of VFM assessment in PPP projects, a robust VFM framework comprising the criteria in the evaluation of PPP bids has yet to be established. The probable reason could be

20、 that most of public procurement projects in Malaysia aim to provide service facilities at the lowest possible cost, they neglecting the importance of VFM for the projects. This paper hence attempts to put forward the

21、issues in establishing the imperative criteria in evaluating the bids of PPP in Malaysia through the questionnaire survey findings. All aspects of criteria financial and non- financial in PPP evaluation bids of VFM were

22、 emphasized. 2 Methodology of research The questionnaire survey helped to determine the perception of both public and private sectors of PPP stakeholders vis-à-vis the criteria involved in evaluating PPP bids. An

23、empirical questionnaire survey was undertaken within the Malaysian PPP stakeholders for a period of four months from February to May 2010. To obtain an accurate and precise information, a purposive sampling technique w

24、as used. The target respondents were selected based on their involvement with Malaysia PPP projects. The data was accumulated from 216 target respondents which comprised of top management levels of contractors, consul

25、tants and governments’ officers. They were chosen as they are the key stakeholders in PPP projects. The targeted respondents have vast knowledge and experiences in BOT and PPP projects local and abroad. A total of 51

26、 respondents completed the questionnaires that were returned representing a response rate of 23.6%. Two separate statistical analyses (descriptive and inferential) were adopted using the Statistical Package for Social