臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：納入風險值於BOT專案財務風險評估
作者：宋兆賢
作者(外文)：Chao-Hsien Sung
校院名稱：國立中山大學
系所名稱：財務管理學系研究所
指導教授：郭照榮
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2010
主題關鍵詞：蒙地卡羅模擬；風險值；BOT；Monte Carlo Simulation；Value-at-Risk
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:1
由於公部門缺乏預算經費以及缺乏效率，以公私合作（PPP）方式來進行大型公共工程成為近年來的一種趨勢，其中最受歡迎的一種形式就是以特許方式為基礎來興建—營運—移轉（BOT）模式。然而，近年來在國際間進行的諸多大型BOT專案當中，工程延宕、預算超支、營運初期的惡劣財務績效等情形仍是時有所聞，台灣高鐵就是一個活生生的實例。問題出在規劃之際對財務可行性過於高估，卻對風險暴露過於低估。
本研究針對於2007年開始進行、總經費高達新台幣428.9億元的高雄洲際貨櫃碼頭BOT案，先以傳統的資本預算決策模式來評估其財務可行性，透過整體計畫觀點、權益觀點來建構財務模型，分別從政府機構、融資機構及私人投資者等三種角度，就個別所重視的財務指標來評估計畫可行性。此雖為傳統評估法，卻忽略了風險評估。因此，本研究引入金融資產評估當中普遍使用的風險值概念，來對計畫的財務風險加以評估。
將三類計畫參與者所重視的四項財務指標包括自償率（SLR）、淨現值（NPV）、債務覆蓋比率（DCR）及利息保障倍數（TIE）之風險值，透過適當設定風險因子的參數之後，進行蒙地卡羅模擬取樣1,000次而求得。透過財務指標之風險值，以及選定一關鍵風險因子後進行波動性的敏感度分析，讓我們更能夠全盤性掌握BOT計畫的財務風險。
研究結果顯示，不但風險因子的不同參數設定會對模擬結果造成影響，有無考慮風險因子之間的相關性也會造成不同的結果。此外，針對關鍵風險因子之波動性進行敏感度分析更能對整體計畫的風險有一全面評估。在三類計畫參與者當中，私人投資者因使用高度財務槓桿而面臨最大的風險曝露，融資機構就其債務償還程度而言，面臨了相對最低的風險，而政府機構關心計畫得以完全自償則有90%的信賴水準。
There is a growing trend to use public-private partnerships (PPP) for infrastructure project delivery due to lack of budget and inefficiency of public sector. The most popular PPP option is a concession-based type such as build-operate-transfer (BOT). However, construction delay, costs overrun, and disastrous financial performance in the early operation phase are not rarely seen in large BOT projects. The case of Taiwan High Speed Rail (THSR) is the evidence. The problem lies in over-optimism in financial feasibility analysis and under-estimation in risk exposure evaluation.
Based on information of Case Project - Kaohsiung Intercontinental Terminal (KIT), which started its Phase One Plan in 2007 at a cost of about NT$42.89 billions in land procurement, peripheral public infrastructure and construction and facilities of the terminal, I will apply traditional capital investment methodology to evaluate its financial feasibility. This is done by calculating key financial indexes from Total Investment Point of View and Equity Point of View and determine whether this project is acceptable or not by conventional criteria from three main participants’ position, including government agency, financial institutions, and private investors. However, we can not realize risk exposure of Case Project from traditional methods. Therefore, ideas of Value-at-Risk (VAR) that commonly used in evaluating risk exposure of financial assets are brought in.
The VAR concepts are used in four financial indexes, including self-liquidation ratio (SLR), net present value (NPV), debt coverage ratio (DCR) and times interest earned (TIE), which are regarded as critical in decision by government agency, private investors, and financial institutions. This is done by applying Monte Carlo Simulation, which involves 1,000 iterations of sampling based on parameter settings of risk factors and consideration of correlations in risk factors. Volatility of key risk factor is analyzed to further realize comprehensively risk exposure in terms of VARs of financial indexes.
Evidences show that, while parameter settings of risk factors are critical to simulations results, consideration of correlations of risk factors will also diverge results from that of ignoring. In addition, sensitivity analysis in terms of volatility in key risk factors presents full-scale financial risk exposure, which is helpful in reaching final decision.
Of all three participants in Case Project, while private investors face greatest risk exposure due to high financial leverage employed, financial institutions confront relatively low risk in terms of loan repayment. From government agency’s view, probability of fully self-liquidated with no subsidy in Case Project is 90%.
Augenblick, M. and Custer, B.C., 1990, The Build, Operate and Transfer (“BOT”) Approach to Infrastructure Projects in Developing Countries, Working Paper 498, The World Bank.
Beale, Chris., Chatain, Michel., Fox, Nathan., Bell, Sandra., Berner, James., Preminger, Robert. and Prins, Jan., 2002, Credit Attributes of Project Finance, The journal of Structured and Project Finance. Fall, pp.5-9.
Brigham, E.F., and Ehrhardt, M.C., 2008, Financial Management – Theory and Practice, 12th, Thomson Southwestern Published.
Chen, Shu-Huei, 1999, Research in Project Finance – Applying to Infrastructure Project, Unpublished Master Thesis, National Sun Yat-sen U.
Council for Economic Planning and Development, 2008, Handbook of Economic Benefits Evaluation and Financial Planning in Public Infrastructure.
Crouhy, Michel, Galai, Dan and Mark, Robert, 2000, Risk Management, published by McGraw-Hill Companies.
Culp, L. Christopher, and Forrester, J. Paul, 2010, Structured Financing Techniques in Oil & Gas Project Finance: Future Flow Securitizations, Prepaids, Volumetric Production Payments, and Project Finance Collateralized Debt Obligations. Draft version, http://ssm.com/abstract=1429501.
Delmon, Jeffrey, 2005, Project Finance, BOT Projects and Risk., Baker & Taylor Books
Dowd, Kevin, 1998, Beyond Value at Risk: The New Science of Risk Management, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Esty, B. C., 2003, The Economic Motivations for Using Project Finance, Working Paper, HBS
Farrell, L.M., 2003, Principal-Agency Risk in Project Finance, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 21, pp.547-561.
Ghersi, Henrique and Sabal, Jaime, 2006, An Introduction to Project Finance in Emerging Markets, working paper, Estudio IESA
Handley, Paul, 1997, A Critical View of the Build-Operate-Transfer Privatisation Process in Asia, Asian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 19, N0. 2, pp. 203-243
Hsieh, C.P. Joseph, 2009, Fundamentals of Corporate Finance, third version, published by BestWise Co., Ltd, Taiwan.
Huang, Ming-Shen, 1999, The Financing and Financial Adjustment in Traffic BOT Infrastructure Project, Journal of Social-Economic Law, No. 23. Chinese version.
Jorion, Philippe, 2000, The New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk. Second Edition.
J.P. Morgan, 1997, Examining Toll Road Feasibility Studies, Municipal Finance Journal, Vol. 18, Spring, pp.44-66.
Kong, Dequan, Tiong, L.K. Robert, Cheah, Y.J. Charles, Permana, Andre, and Ehrlich, Matthias, 2008, Assessment of Credit Risk in Project Finance, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Nov. pp.876-884.
Luehrman, A. Timothy, 1998, Strategy as a Portfolio of Real Options, Harvard Business Review, September-October, pp.89-99.
Mao, Chih-Kuo, 1998, Basic Concepts of Private Participation in Public Infrastructure, Lecture in “BOT Promotion Camp” held by Council for Economic Planning and Development.
Megginson, W. L. and Kleimeier, S. 2000, Are Project Finance Loans Different From Other Syndicated Credits? Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 13, pp. 75–87.
Miller JB and Evje RH., 1999, The Practical Application of Delivery Methods to Project Portfolios. Construction Management Economics, Vol. 17. pp.669–77.
Nag, Ashok Kumar, 2007, Risk in Infrastructure Project Financing, Riskkraft Consulting Ltd. http://www.riskraft.com/8.pdf
Ng, S.T. and Wong, Y.M.W., 2007, Payment and Audit Mechanisms for Nonprivate-Funded PPP-based Infrastructure Maintenance Projects, Construction Management and Economics 25 (9), 915–924.
Perry, J.G. and Hayes, H.W., 1985, Risk and Its Management in Construction Projects, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 1, Design and Construction, 78, 499-521.
Pouliquen, L.Y., 1970, Risk Analysis in Project Appraisal, World Bank Staff Occasional Paper No: 11, Johns Hopkins Press Ltd,, Baltimore.
Regan, Michael, 2009, A Survey of Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Public Private Partnerships, Research report by Bond University and Infrastructure Association of Queensland. http://www.iaq.com.au/images/PDF/Research/MR%20Research%20Report%20No%202.pdf
Savvakis, S., 1994, Risk Analysis in Investment Appraisal, Project Appraisal Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.3-18.
Smith, N.J., 2008, Engineering Project Management, 3rd edition, Wiley-Blackwell, Boston.
Standard and Poor’s, 2002, Credit Implications of Traffic Risk in Start-up Toll Facilities, Working Paper
Subramanian, Krishnamurthy., Tung, Frederick., and Wang, Xue, 2007, Project Finance versus Corporate Finance., Working paper, http://www.bus.emory.edu/ksubramanian/documents/projfinance_apr27.pdf
Tiong, L.K. Robert, 1990, BOT Projects：Risks and Securities, Journal of Construction Management and Economics, Vol.8, pp.315-328.
Wang, Chin-Lung, 2008, Analysis of Optimum Capital Structure of BOT Projects – The Case Study of Taiwan High Speed Rail Project. Unpublished Master Thesis, National United U.
Wang, Chih-Ping, 2001, Planning of Financial Evaluation Model on Private Participation in Public Infrastructure, Research project of Public Construction Commission, Executive Yuan, Taiwan.
Ye, Sudong and Tiong, L.K., 2003, The Effect of Concession Period Design on Completion Risk Management of BOT Projects, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 21, pp.471-482.
Ye, Sudong and Tiong, Robert, 2007, NPV-AT-RISK Method in Infrastructure Project Investment Evaluation, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, May/June, pp.227-233
Zhang XQ and Kumaraswamy M.M. 2001, Hong Kong Experience in Managing BOT Projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 127, No. 2, March/April, pp.154-162.
Zhang, XQ, 2006, Factor Analysis of Public Clients’ Best-Value Objective in Public-Privately Partnered Infrastructure Projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132, No. 9, pp. 956-965.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1062（臺灣：1036，外國：26） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2488187 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68299611
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上