IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/otamic/v11y2019i1p1968-1974n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Engineering Project Organization Society and megaprojects: literature analysis using keywords

Author

Listed:
  • Ceric Anita

    (Department of Construction Management and Economics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia;)

  • Sertic Josip

    (Senior Adviser, Ernst & Young, Advisory Croatia.)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the Engineering Project Organization Society (EPOS) has addressed the issue of megaprojects at their annual conferences organized from 2006 to 2016. The literature analysis used in this paper is a form of content analysis. It focuses on the usage of a particular term in scientific papers. In this case, the key term is “megaprojects” or “mega-projects”. Papers in which this term appears are selected for further analysis. The findings show that the main keyword “megaproject” or “mega-project” appears 22 times in the identified papers. It appears in 10 titles and nine abstracts. Most important for this literature analysis, it appears in seven lists of keywords. Literature analysis proceeded by analyzing the associated keywords in the seven papers in which the main keyword “megaproject” or “mega-projects” can be found in the listed keywords. The analysis shows that the main associated keywords are “governance”, “complexity”, and “trust”. This research provides a view of the collective understanding of megaprojects within the EPOS community and helps to shape further research in this field. In addition, the results of this research can be seen as a step forward for scholars and practitioners to discuss and develop a new theoretical framework for better understanding of megaproject governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Ceric Anita & Sertic Josip, 2019. "The Engineering Project Organization Society and megaprojects: literature analysis using keywords," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 1968-1974, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:otamic:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:1968-1974:n:4
    DOI: 10.2478/otmcj-2018-0015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/otmcj-2018-0015
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/otmcj-2018-0015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brookes, Naomi J. & Locatelli, Giorgio, 2015. "Power plants as megaprojects: Using empirics to shape policy, planning, and construction management," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 57-66.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johan Ninan & Stewart Clegg & Steve Burdon & John Clay, 2023. "Reimagining Infrastructure Megaproject Delivery: An Australia—New Zealand Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Teti, Emanuele & Tului, Stefano, 2020. "Do mergers and acquisitions create shareholder value in the infrastructure and utility sectors? Analysis of market perceptions," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    3. Locatelli, Giorgio & Invernizzi, Diletta Colette & Brookes, Naomi J., 2017. "Project characteristics and performance in Europe: An empirical analysis for large transport infrastructure projects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 108-122.
    4. Ulrik Kohl & John Andersen, 2022. "Copenhagen’s Struggle to Become the World’s First Carbon Neutral Capital: How Corporatist Power Beats Sustainability," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 230-241.
    5. Invernizzi, Diletta Colette & Locatelli, Giorgio & Brookes, Naomi & Davis, Allison, 2020. "Qualitative comparative analysis as a method for project studies: The case of energy infrastructure," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    6. Giorgio Locatelli, 2018. "Why are Megaprojects, Including Nuclear Power Plants, Delivered Overbudget and Late? Reasons and Remedies," Papers 1802.07312, arXiv.org.
    7. Silvia Lucciarini & Rossana Galdini, 2023. "Bridging the “consent gap”: mechanisms of legitimization in a cross-border megaproject," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 212-225.
    8. Hongyang Li & Ruoyu Jin & Xin Ning & Martin Skitmore & Tianyao Zhang, 2018. "Prioritizing the Sustainability Objectives of Major Public Projects in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, November.
    9. Jesus Javier Losada-Maseda & Laura Castro-Santos & Manuel Ángel Graña-López & Ana Isabel García-Diez & Almudena Filgueira-Vizoso, 2020. "Analysis of Contracts to Build Energy Infrastructures to Optimize the OPEX," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Gregory, Julian, 2020. "Governance, scale, scope: A review of six South African electricity generation infrastructure megaprojects," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    11. Kim, Yeong Jae & Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2022. "Identifying optimal financial budget distributions for the low-carbon energy transition between emerging and developed countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    12. Greco, Marco & Locatelli, Giorgio & Lisi, Stefano, 2017. "Open innovation in the power & energy sector: Bringing together government policies, companies’ interests, and academic essence," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 316-324.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:otamic:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:1968-1974:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.