Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper's objective is to quantify delivery methods' performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationPipelines 2018
Subtitle of host publicationPlanning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference
EditorsChristopher C. Macey, Jason S. Lueke
PublisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Pages328-333
Number of pages6
ISBN (Electronic)9780784481646
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018
EventPipelines 2018 Conference: Planning and Design - Toronto, Canada
Duration: Jul 15 2018Jul 18 2018

Other

OtherPipelines 2018 Conference: Planning and Design
CountryCanada
CityToronto
Period7/15/187/18/18

Fingerprint

Wastewater
infrastructure
wastewater
Water
water
Environmental regulations
Water treatment
Potable water
Wastewater treatment
Costs
Managers
Aging of materials
stakeholder
method
project
analysis
cost
Industry
population growth
industry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
  • Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Civil and Structural Engineering

Cite this

El Asmar, M., & Ariaratnam, S. (2018). Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance. In C. C. Macey, & J. S. Lueke (Eds.), Pipelines 2018: Planning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference (pp. 328-333). American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784481646.034

Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance. / El Asmar, Mounir; Ariaratnam, Samuel.

Pipelines 2018: Planning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference. ed. / Christopher C. Macey; Jason S. Lueke. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2018. p. 328-333.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

El Asmar, M & Ariaratnam, S 2018, Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance. in CC Macey & JS Lueke (eds), Pipelines 2018: Planning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), pp. 328-333, Pipelines 2018 Conference: Planning and Design, Toronto, Canada, 7/15/18. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784481646.034
El Asmar M, Ariaratnam S. Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance. In Macey CC, Lueke JS, editors, Pipelines 2018: Planning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 2018. p. 328-333 https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784481646.034
El Asmar, Mounir ; Ariaratnam, Samuel. / Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance. Pipelines 2018: Planning and Design - Proceedings of Sessions of the Pipelines 2018 Conference. editor / Christopher C. Macey ; Jason S. Lueke. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2018. pp. 328-333
@inproceedings{ffd43a515bbf4371b65da3312c373cb6,
title = "Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance",
abstract = "This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper's objective is to quantify delivery methods' performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.",
author = "{El Asmar}, Mounir and Samuel Ariaratnam",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1061/9780784481646.034",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "328--333",
editor = "Macey, {Christopher C.} and Lueke, {Jason S.}",
booktitle = "Pipelines 2018",
publisher = "American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance

AU - El Asmar, Mounir

AU - Ariaratnam, Samuel

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper's objective is to quantify delivery methods' performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.

AB - This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper's objective is to quantify delivery methods' performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050916627&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050916627&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1061/9780784481646.034

DO - 10.1061/9780784481646.034

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 328

EP - 333

BT - Pipelines 2018

A2 - Macey, Christopher C.

A2 - Lueke, Jason S.

PB - American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)

ER -