Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Identifying critical risks in Sponge City PPP projects using DEMATEL

method: A case study of China
Lin Zhang a, Xuejie Sun a, *, Hong Xue b
a
School of Management and Engineering, Shandong Jianzhu University, Jinan, 250101, China
b
School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sponge City (SC) projects offer an effective measure for coping with frequent occurrence of urban
Received 12 September 2018 flooding as well as water shortage. In China, enormous demand for urban regeneration and short of
Received in revised form capital has precipitated the growth of publiceprivate capitalhip (PPP) mode for achieving urban sus-
11 March 2019
tainability. Generally, risk identification is perceived as a crucial step as to ensure the success of PPP
Accepted 7 April 2019
Available online 8 April 2019
mode. However, little attention has been paid to identify critical risks in Sponge City PPP projects for
emerging countries, for example China. This paper aims to investigate the critical risk factors of Sponge
City PPP projects in the context of China. The list of risk factors used for analysis are gathered from
Keywords:
Sponge city
literature review, research group brainstorming, and expert interview. Decision-making trial and eval-
Public-private capitalhip uation laboratory (DEMATEL) method is employed in the study to prioritize the risks and then analyze
DEMATEL interdependence between them as to recognize critical risks. The research results show that inadequate
Risk analysis supervision system (C1), government intervention (C2), immature law and regulations (C5), project
fragmentation (C13), and unclear boundary of catchment area (C14) are the critical risk factors. The
findings in this study can provide helpful references not only for the local government to adopt man-
agement measures for promoting sustainable SC projects, but also for private capital to effectively
mitigate risks in future SC projects.
© 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction immense pressure on urban drainage systems, but also produces

In recent years, rapid urbanization process in China has led to
worsening “city syndrome”, including the issues of natural
ecological deterioration, poor surface water permeability, severe
urban flooding, degraded water source pollution and insufficient
water supply and aggravated water shortage, etc.(Li et al., 2017;
Wang et al., 2018). For example, the construction of roofs, roads,
and grounds and the construction waste generated by them in cities
has changed the original natural ecological environment and hy-
drological characteristics, which causes that rainwater cannot
permeat to the ground in time and also poses challenges to the
sustainable development of the construction industry (Tanik, 2006;
Wu et al., 2017). Additionally, the traditional urban drainage sys-
tems cannot easily adapt to the runoff and flood peak arisen from
heavy rainfall, thus resulting in urban flooding (Qin et al., 2013).
Moreover, traditional surface runoff method not only imposes
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhanglin2007@sdjzu.edu.cn (X. Sun).
urban non-point water source pollution. There are about 45% and
17% of Chinese cities that are respectively subject to insufficient
water supply and severe water shortage (Jiang et al., 2018). Within
this context, to cope with these challenges, Chinese government
formally launched “Pilot Sponge City Initiative” to promote the
sustainable urbanization strategies in December 2013 (Chan et al.,
2018).
Nowadays, SC projects are needed to implement in most Chi-
nese cities, especially for renewing the existing obsolete under-
ground pipe network system, which urgently requires large-scale
reconstruction (Xia et al., 2017). On the one hand, it heavily de-
pends on investment from the government. According to the data
of the Ministry of Finance (MOF), for 30 selected pilot SC projects, a
subsidy of US $ 60e90 million needed per year has been committed
for each city lasting for 3 years (Finance, 2015). While it is
approximately US$ 29 million per square kilometer in SC projects
construction (Jiang et al., 2018), it is hard to sustain only from
governmental financing assistance, due to unclear plan for future
investment in the coming decades. In the other hand,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.067
0959-6526/© 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
950 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958
Publiceprivate capitalhip (PPP) mode can be considered, which can
effectively deliver value-for money public infrastructure or services
(Ke et al., 2010). It is also a suitable option in SC projects recognized
by several scholars. Through questionnaires survey, Wang et al.
(2017) found that combined government investment with PPP
financing mode is a feasible funding channel in SC projects. Tong
et al. (2017) found that project financing capacity was improved
and local debt risk could be reduced by the application of PPP
model. A similar study also showed that PPP mode was provided as
a new financing method for urban water environment manage-
ment (An et al., 2018).
Although PPP mode applied to infrastructure construction is a
popularly accepted practice worldwide, most PPP projects en-
counters various risks, because of complexity and uncertainty of
PPP projects (Hwang et al., 2013). Many scholars at home and
abroad have conducted extensive research on the risks of PPP
projects, which mainly focused on risk identification and classifi-
cation (Moles and Williams, 1995), risk allocation (Jin and Zhang,
2011), and risk management (Cui et al., 2018). As for risk assess-
ment methods, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) (Erdogan
et al., 2017; Sara et al., 2015), decision-making trial and evalua-
tion laboratory (DEMATEL) (Pandey and Kumar, 2017; Sara et al.,
2015), artificial neural networks (Jin and Zhang, 2011), and other
similar methods. PPP mode was widely adopted in highway infra-
structure projects (Kumar et al., 2018), waste-to-energy projects
(Xu et al., 2015), utility services (Chan et al., 2018). etc. Although
rich research results of PPP risk factors have been obtained, to the
best of our knowledge, research on the critical risk identification of
the Sponge City PPP project in China is relatively limited. Several
scholars have studied the necessity of Sponge City PPP projects
implementation, reasonable investment and financing methods,
and innovative technology (Jia et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2018).
However, research on exploring critical risks of Sponge City PPP
projects in China is missing. Therefore, the present study can fill
this research gap.
The SC projects are hampered by inertia of traditional ap-
proaches, limited technical guidance on planning, design and
assessment of SC facilities, intricate construction and maintenance
process, inadequate investment and return estimates. (Wang et al.,
2018), which encounters additional and distinctive risks in Sponge
City PPP projects. The present study aims to recognize the critical
risks in advance in Sponge City PPP projects construction. As for the
government, the findings can not only guide the cooperation be-
tween government and private capital, and then provide valuable
measures for risk management, but also respond to ambitious
governmental strategies and urgent demand for a sustainable ur-
banization development. As for the private capital, they can be
aware of the critical risk factors ahead, which can contribute to
properly make decision for participating in Sponge City PPP pro-
jects and avoid losses to some degree in the process of project
implementation. Therefore, identifying the critical risk factors of
the Sponge City PPP projects is essential.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2
presents the concept of Sponge City, PPP financing mode, risks in
the PPP projects and identification of the initial risk list. Section 3
introduces methodology used in this study, including brain-
storming, expert interview, and DEMATEL method. Section 4 dis-
plays the results of qualitative analysis and presents the discussion.
Section 5 draws the conclusions of the study.
2. Literature review
2.1. Sponge City
While making great contributions to society and economy,
construction industry also play a negative impact on the environ-
ment (Wu et al., 2019). It is crucial to promote green building to
achieve sustainable urbanization (Chang et al., 2011; Cheng, 2003).
SC construction can reasonably satisfy the demands of water con-
servation, which is considered as the principal branch in green
building research (Zhang and Zhang, 2012). The concept similar
with SC in developed countries was stemmed from real practices in
urban stormwater pollution problems since the 1970s. For example,
in the United States, considering the problem of stormwater runoff
pollution, the concept of best management practices (BMPs) has
been proposed for non-point source pollution control, and low
impact development (LID) has been adopted to control runoff and
pollutants (Ice, 2004; Xu et al., 2017). Likewise, sustainable
drainage system in the United Kingdom (Ellis and Lundy, 2016),
water sensitive urban design in Australian (Liu A et al., 2016), and
low impact city design and development in New Zealand (Fletcher
et al., 2018) have also been put forward. In the emerging countries,
for example, China also faced increasingly aggravated water
shortages, water pollution, floods, and other water issues, due to
the rapid urbanization process (Jia et al., 2016). Referred mature
experiences and practices from developed countries, the concept of
Sponge City has been launched by Chinese government in late 2013
(Wang et al., 2018).
The SC has the same function as a sponge, which can effectively
adapt to environmental changes and handle natural disasters. The
“green” measures, such as grass-planting ditch, water seepage
brick, rainwater garden, and sink green space, are adopted in
organizing drainage systems. Water can be absorbed in the event of
heavy rainfall, and when necessary, the stored water can be
released in time of drought (Wang et al., 2018). Therefore, SC pro-
jects can contribute to preventing floods and effectively collecting
rainwater for future use, thereby satisfying the requirements of
green infrastructure and sustainable development. Chan et al.
(2018) concluded that SC construction can play a positive influ-
ence on the management of urban water resources, urban flood
control, ecological construction, and land use. Whereas massive
investment is need to implement the SC projects in China, espe-
cially after the three-year pilot period with governmental subsidies
(Wang et al., 2018). Thus, the government must establish favorable
investment conditions (Jiang et al., 2018) and encourage private
capital to invest in construction and operation of SC projects (Lang
et al., 2017).
2.2. Publiceprivate capitalhip (PPP)
The PPP mode was first proposed in the United Kingdom in
1982; its main objective has been to establish partnership between
government agencies and private companies to provide public fa-
cilities or services under the principle of sharing interests and risks
(Grimsey and Lewis, 2002; Riccio, 2014; Spackman, 2002). PPP
mode can make fully use of governmental advantages in regulation
and effectively overcome the fiscal constraints of the government,
as well as poor management technologies to realize the goal of
optimizing private resource allocation and maximizing corporate
profits (Xu et al., 2015). Nowadays, PPP mode has been widely
applied to transportation, sports facilities, waste energy, and a se-
ries of infrastructure projects worldwide (Carbonara et al., 2014;
Cui et al., 2018; Yuan et al., 2018).
To promote SC projects in large scale, the Chinese General Office
of the State Council has issued a report called “Guiding Opinions on
Promoting the Construction of Sponge City” in 2015, which
mentioned that PPP arrangement would be supported in the SC
projects and private capital would been encouraged to participate.
However, in the life cycle of Sponge City PPP projects many un-
certain risk factors may emerge in the aspects of government,
 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958
financing, construction and operation. These risk factors can affect
the success of the Sponge City PPP project.
2.3. Risks in the PPP projects
More attention was always paid to the risk analysis and man-
agement of the PPP projects by the researchers. Some scholars have
systematically reviewed the risk factors in the PPP projects (Boeing
Singh and Kalidindi, 2006; Choi et al., 2010). For ease of analysis,
others have divided risk factors into different categories. For
example, Wu et al. (2018) identified 37 risk factors of the PPP
projects from the literature review, and further divided into four
categories: legal and sociopolitical, construction and operation,
macroeconomic, and government risks. Hwang et al. (2013) pre-
sented 42 critical factors that affected the success of the PPP pro-
jects in Singapore, which were assigned to the government and the
private sector. Similarly, risk factors in the PPP projects were
grouped into four categories, including economic, institutional,
social and industrial, and project-specific factors (Jin and Zhang,
2011). In summary, considering the characteristics of the Sponge
City projects, the risk factors are divided into four aspects, namely
risks in government, financing, construction, and operation in this
present study.
2.3.1. Government risks
Government risks are mostly related to the governmental
behavior, including government corruption (Chan et al., 2011),
government intervention (Ke et al., 2010), government default
(Gao, 2017), project approval and licensing delays (Ng and
Loosemore, 2007), inadequate supervision system (Xu et al.,
2010), and immature law and regulations (Lang et al., 2017),etc.
For instance, government corruption, default, or intervention may
result in indirect or direct losses for the private capital participated
in the Sponge City PPP project (Gao, 2017). In addition, the inade-
quate supervision system as well as immature law and regulations
may cause some conflicts issues in the process of construction and
operation.
2.3.2. Financing risks
Financing risks typically include credit risk (Lang et al., 2017),
inflation (Xu et al., 2015), and change in the rate of interest (ex-
change rate) (Xu et al., 2010). Most of the Chinese PPP projects are
mainly dependent on financing from banks (Wang et al., 2017).
Poor credit make it difficult for private capital to collect funds.
Moreover, the exchange rate and inflation are dynamic, instable for
the PPP projects in the long operation period (Wang et al., 2017).
Generally, financing risks are closely related to financing cost and
the expected return on investment in PPP projects.
2.3.3. Construction risks
Construction risks are also an important risk that covers cost
overspending (Kumar et al., 2018), lack of technical ability (Xia
et al., 2017), time delay (Liu, 2017), and force majeure (Shrestha
et al., 2017). Compared with other infrastructure projects, there
are more rigorous hydrogeological exploration required in the SC
projects (Jiang et al., 2018). Thus, the contractors are required to
have sufficient technical capabilities to cope with. Otherwise, an
extensive range of risks in ground condition may be encountered in
the construction process (Ke et al., 2010). Moreover, force majeure,
such as earthquakes, floods, and other bad weather conditions or
physical damage, which is constantly unpredictable, adversely af-
fects the schedule and cost of the PPP projects.
2.3.4. Operation risks
During the operation stage of the PPP projects, risks in
951
insufficient operating income (Shrestha et al., 2017) and shortage of
operators’ ability alike may lead to the failure of PPP projects (Gao,
2017; Zhao, 2017). The expected return of investment in PPP pro-
jects is a key issue for private capital. In general, PPP projects are
characterized with long concession period, even lasting for 30 years
of concession period (Cruz and Rui, 2013; Wang et al., 2017).
Insufficient operation income may render early termination of PPP
projects. In addition, operators with limited abilities cannot timely
adjust to constantly changing market and implement effective
control measures in the operation stage (Zhao, 2017).
2.4. Identification of the initial risk list
Through literature review, four first-level risk factors in the as-
pects of government, financing, construction, and operation risks,
have been proposed. A total of 15 s-level risk factors in the PPP
projects have been identified from 12 pre-reviewed international
and Chinese journal articles as listed in Table 1.
3. Methodology
3.1. Brainstorming
Brainstorming method was initiated by Osborne in 1938, which
can provide a chance for the research team to think positively,
speak and express their opinions in a freely and unconstrained
atmosphere. Considering the uniqueness of the Sponge City PPP
projects, brainstorming was adopted in this study to revise and
improve the reliability of the risk list.
Through brainstorming, the initial risk list was assessed and
adjusted by our research group. In addition to the general risks of
PPP projects, six specific risk factors in SC projects were added.
More specifically, “difficult transformation of sewage pipe,” “lack of
professional consulting enterprises,” “project fragmentation,” and
“unclear boundary of catchment area” were considered in the
construction risk category. Furthermore, the “lack of an effective
payment mechanism,” and “division of responsibility for operation
and maintenance” were included in the operation risk category.
After that, the initial risk list was further subjected to modify in the
next expert interview.
3.2. Expert interview
Expert interview was a frequently used method to modify or
adjust the initial risk list as to determine the final risk factors (Bing
et al., 2005; Hwang et al., 2013; Jin and Zhang, 2011; Thorne et al.,
2018). In our study, this method was applied twice. In the first
round, the related risk factors were added or deleted to obtain the
final risk list of Sponge City PPP projects. In the second round, the
risk factors were compared and evaluated by the experts.
To verify the selected risk factors and determine the weight of
each in the Sponge City PPP projects, experts were selected to
satisfy one of the following conditions: the professor affiliated in
well-known universities with more than five years experience in
PPP research; the expert actively occupied with the PPP training for
the government agencies and private capital; the general manager
employed in large PPP consulting companies with several PPP
demonstration projects practice; the experienced professionals in
project management companies, who have participated in several
infrastructure PPP projects; the lawyer in well-known law firm,
who can supply the legal advice on PPP practice; managers of
private capital with more than one PPP project experience; the
government officials responsible for promoting PPP project. Most of
the experts had rich PPP practical experience and served as PPP
project evaluation experts in the database of the National
952 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958

Table 1
Initial risk list of the Sponge City PPP project.

First-level risk factors Second-level risk factors Reference

Factor 1: Government risks

1. government corruption Chan et al. (2011)
2. inadequate supervision system Xu et al. (2010)
3. government intervention Ke et al. (2010)
4. project approval and licensing delays Ng and Loosemore (2007)
5. government default Gao (2017)
6. immature law and regulations Lang et al. (2017)
Factor 2: Financing risks
7. credit risk Lang et al. (2017)
8. inflation Xu et al. (2015)
9. exchange rate Xu et al. (2010)
Factor 3: Construction risks
10. cost overspending Kumar et al. (2018)
11. lack of technical ability Xia et al. (2017)
12. time delay Liu (2017)
13. force majeure Shrestha et al. (2017)
Factor 4: Operation risks
14. insufficient operating income Shrestha et al. (2017)
15. shortage of operator’s ability Zhao (2017)

Table 2
Information of the experts.

No. Work unit Position

1 Tsinghua University Professor

2 Southeast University Professor
3 Lu Rong PPP Consulting Firm PPP consulting firm
4 Jing Wei Law Firm Lawyer
5 China Construction Eighth Engineering Division Corporation Limited General manager
6 Jinan Urban Construction Group Chief engineer
7 Da Yue PPP Consulting Firm Professional advisor
8 Chongqing University Professor
9 Jinan City Financing Department Official
10 Shaping the Future of New Industry Cities General manager

Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of
Finance (MOF). To economically and efficiently conduct the expert
interview, our research group attended the third PPP academic
forum in May 2018, which was an influential conference in the
Chinese PPP academic researchers and practitioners, with more
than 600 participants. Three trained graduate students assisted to
conduct the expert interview. Finally, 10 experts were selected. And
the work unit and position related are presented in Table 2.
In the first round of the expert interview, the same opinions
were proposed, that government corruption can be excluded from
the initial risk list because the governance system in China was
gradually refined. Along with public participation, transparent and
stringent governance systems for public infrastructure or services
in China has been established. Likewise, credit risk can be removed

Table 3
Final risk list of the Sponge City PPP projects.

First-level risk factors Second-level risk factors Reference

B1:Government risks
C1:inadequate supervision system Xu et al. (2010)
C2:government intervention Ke et al. (2010)
C3:project approval and licensing delays Ng and Loosemore (2007)
C4:government default Gao (2017)
C5: immature law and regulations Lang et al. (2017)
B2:Financing risks
C6:inflation Xu et al. (2015)
C7:exchange rate Xu et al. (2010)
B3:Construction risks
C8:difficult transformation of sewage pipe Brainstorming
C9:cost overspending Kumar et al. (2018)
C10:lack of technical ability Xia et al. (2017)
C11:time delay Liu (2017)
C12:lack of professional consulting enterprises Brainstorming
C13:project fragmentation Brainstorming
C14:unclear boundary of catchment area Brainstorming
C15:force majeure Shrestha et al. (2017)
B4:Operation risks
C16:insufficient operating income Shrestha et al. (2017)
C17:lack of an effective payment mechanism Brainstorming
C18:division of responsibility for operation and maintenance Brainstorming
 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958 953

Standardizing the
Collecting and
Establishing the direct-relation matrix Calculating R, Determining and
determining the Drawing the
direct relation Z and calculating the C, R+C, and analyzing the
results of the scatter plot
matrix total relation matrix R C critical risk factors
questionnaire
T

Fig. 1. Flowchart of DEMATEL

on account of the stringent prequalification procedure to screen
private capital. Shortage of operators’ ability is not considered.
Because private capital is currently selected through rigorous
competitive bidding procedure and have a remarkable advantage in
advanced technology and rich experience. In summary, through
expert interviews, four risk factors, “government corruption”,
“credit risk,” and “shortage of operators’ ability” were eliminated.
And then, 18 risk factors are shown in Table 3.
In the second round of expert interview, the questionnaire
survey for scoring each factor was designed in line with the final
risk list of the Sponge City PPP projects. The professional compe-
tence and experience of the experts can ensure the reliability of the
findings. The findings are presented in Section 4.
method is also suitable for investigating critical risk factors in the
Sponge City PPP projects.
Through the DEMATEL method, the value of “four degrees” of
each factor, including “R”, “C”, “R þ C”, and “ReC”, can be calculated
to identify the critical factors (Tseng, 2009; Tzeng et al., 2007). Here,
“R” indicates the degree of influence exerted on other factors, and
“C” represents the degree of influence received from other factors.
“R þ C” denotes the degree of relation with other factors, and “ReC”
means the influence strength, which can be divided into dis-
patchers or receivers. Therefore, the critical risk factors can be
identified by analyzing the value of factors.

3.3.2. Procedures of the DEMATEL method

3.3. DEMATEL method
3.3.1. Introduction of the DEMATEL method
Seyed-Hosseini et al. (2006) proposed the DEMATEL method,
which can not only reveal the relationship structure between the
risk factors but also identify the critical factors through the matrix
calculation. The causality between complex factors can also be
analyzed by the DEMATEL method (Wu and Lee, 2007), which was
widely applied to various research fields, such as energy analysis
(Luthra et al., 2016), telecommunications company (Uygun et al.,
2015), transportation (Dinçer et al., 2017; Zhan et al., 2017), and
hospital services (Shieh et al., 2010),etc. Therefore, the DEMATEL
The DEMATEL method was employed as illustrated in Fig. 1,
followed by the four steps.
Step 1: Collecting information
To collect risk factors in the Sponge City PPP projects, the initial
risk list was obtained by reviewing the previous relevant literature
and classifying the risks into four aspects: government, financing,
construction, and operation risks. After the brainstorming of the
research group and expert interview, the initial risk list was revised
and adjusted to fit the Chinese context. Afterwards, the final risk list
for the Sponge City PPP projects was obtained.

Summarizing the
Literature
general risks of
review
PPP project

Establishing the
risk list for
Brainstorming Expert interview
Sponge City
PPP project

Adding characteristics Eliminating Experts

risk factors of Sponge unnecessary risks scoring
City

Establishing the direct

relation matrix

DEMATEL

Results analysis and

conclusion

Fig. 2. Research framework.

954 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958

Step 2: Establishing the direct relation matrix
The final risk list was sent to the qualified experts to judge the
importance of each factor, adopting a 0e5 scoring method.
Generally, multiple experts were involved in the process of expert
scoring. The weighted average method was adopted to record the
influence degree. The effect of factor i on factor j is denoted as aij. If
the risk factor i does not directly influence the risk factor j, then the
corresponding score in the matrix was recorded as 0. Similarly, 1, 2,
3, 4, and 5 represent very weak influence, weak influence, mod-
erate influence, strong influence, and very strong influence,
respectively. And then, the direct relation matrix (M) can be
expressed as below:
The standardization of the direct relation matrix and calculation
of the total relation matrix is also required in Step 2. The standard
matrix Z is achieved by the standardized direct relation matrix M,
the scatter plot could be drawn as to determine the critical risk
factors.
Combining with aforementioned methodology, Research
Framework can be seen in Fig. 2.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Results
After the second round of expert interview, the average score for
each risk factor is evaluated by the experts. The value of weight for
18 risk factors in the Sponge City PPP project is further calculated.
The direct relation matrix is expressed in Table 4.
By standardizing the direct relation matrix M, the total relation
matrix T is established as below:

0:015 0:092 0:108 0:081 0:093 0:004 0:007 0:145 0:180 0:038 0:199 0:079 0:075 0:097 0:000 0:143 0:139 0139
0:083 0:027 0:130 0:074 0:114 0:034 0:029 0:152 0:184 0:051 0:177 0:092 0:096 0:108 0:000 0:161 0:155 0:150
0:005 0:009 0:007 0:017 0:069 0:001 0:003 0:068 0:147 0:024 0:143 0:044 0:026 0:017 0:000 0:103 0:056 0:060
0:010 0:053 0:046 0:014 0:098 0:013 0:016 0:073 0:113 0:028 0:115 0:053 0:030 0:050 0:000 0:121 0:128 0:114
0:016 0:013 0:030 0:039 0:014 0:002 0:014 0:096 0:157 0:055 0:156 0:061 0:021 0:021 0:000 0:125 0:093 0:096
0:003 0:007 0:003 0:004 0:004 0:005 0:084 0:058 0:126 0:008 0:114 0:018 0:012 0:012 0:000 0:060 0:068 0:040
0:002 0:005 0:002 0:003 0:003 0:062 0:006 0:026 0:117 0:005 0:104 0:013 0:009 0:009 0:000 0:033 0:045 0:026
0:006 0:029 0:012 0:008 0:021 0:001 0:003 0:033 0:140 0:064 0:137 0:093 0:062 0:062 0:000 0:106 0:029 0:044
0:004 0:016 0:007 0:006 0:006 0:001 0:002 0:039 0:028 0:018 0:076 0:035 0:040 0:031 0:000 0:067 0:055 0:050
T¼
0:006 0:021 0:010 0:018 0:031 0:001 0:004 0:131 0:126 0:018 0:151 0:070 0:042 0:052 0:000 0:130 0:057 0:054
0:015 0:019 0:010 0:007 0:008 0:001 0:003 0:062 0:125 0:012 0:038 0:058 0:045 0:055 0:000 0:094 0:041 0:056
0:006 0:010 0:040 0:019 0:041 0:001 0:003 0:052 0:099 0:044 0:108 0:024 0:065 0:047 0:000 0:125 0:076 0:074
0:028 0:025 0:045 0:041 0:016 0:001 0:003 0:089 0:128 0:045 0:128 0:048 0:022 0:082 0:000 0:094 0:054 0:127
0:009 0:041 0:053 0:020 0:024 0:002 0:004 0:095 0:126 0:036 0:133 0:038 0:060 0:022 0:000 0:110 0:060 0:096
0:004 0:007 0:014 0:004 0:026 0:000 0:003 0:090 0:129 0:011 0:124 0:021 0:014 0:014 0:000 0:113 0:038 0:042
0:002 0:004 0:003 0:003 0:004 0:001 0:021 0:022 0:067 0:024 0:039 0:029 0:007 0:006 0:000 0:018 0:031 0:041
0:006 0:028 0:010 0:027 0:031 0:001 0:004 0:064 0:051 0:022 0:096 0:069 0:014 0:014 0:000 0:117 0:024 0:094
0:035 0:030 0:030 0:028 0:023 0:001 0:003 0:075 0:081 0:012 0:099 0:032 0:015 0:016 0:000 0:097 0:073 0:028

as follows:
Z ¼ M/t
Then, the total relation matrix T can be attained as follows:
T ¼ Z (IZ) 1, where (IZ) 1 is the inverse matrix of (IZ),
Step 3: Calculating the total relation matrix to obtain “R”, “C”,
“R þ C”, and “ReC00
In the total relation matrix T, “R” is the sum of the rows, and “C”
denotes the sum of the columns. “R þ C” indicates the relationship
between each factor, that is, a high numeric value denotes a strong
connection. Moreover, “ReC” is the impact on other factors. If
“ReC”>0, the factor will be a dispatcher. When the amount of
“ReC” is high, its influence on other factors is also high. If “ReC” <0,
the factor will be a receiver. In the present study, the risk factors are
ranked by the numeric value of “R þ C”, and then the top ranking
list factors could be provided for decision-makers.
Step 4: Drawing the scatter plot on the basis of the cause degree
“ReC00
Based on the results of the cause degree, “ReC” of each factor,
In addition, the values of “R”, “C”, “R þ C”, and “ReC” are also
calculated, as displayed in Table 5.
To provide a clear distinction between each risk factor, the cause
degree (ReC) in the scatter plot (as depicted in Fig. 3), is drawn
according to the value listed in Table 5.
As exhibited in Table 5, 11 risk factors are identified with positive
“ReC” value, including inadequate supervision system (C1 ¼1.380),
government intervention (C2 ¼ 1.386), project approval and
licensing delays (C3 ¼ 0.238), government default (C4 ¼ 0.661),
immature law and regulations (C5 ¼ 0.384), inflation (C6 ¼ 0.493),
exchange rate (C7 ¼ 0.261), lack of technical ability (C10 ¼ 0.406),
project fragmentation (C13 ¼ 0.321), unclear boundary of catch-
ment area (C14 ¼ 0.213), and force majeure (C15 ¼ 0.655). This sug-
gests that the influence of these factors on other factors are more
significant than the influence that others exert on themselves. In
addition, seven risk factors have negative “ReC” values. These
factors consist of difficult transformation of sewage pipe
(C8 ¼ 0.517), cost overspending (C9 ¼ 1.641), time delay
(C11 ¼ 1.490), lack of professional consulting enterprises
(C12 ¼ ¼ 0.044), insufficient operating income (C16 ¼ 1.497),
lack of an effective payment mechanism (C17 ¼ 0.550), and divi-
sion of responsibility for operation and maintenance
(C18 ¼ 0.658). On the contrary, the result is reflective of the fact
 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958 955

Table 4
Direct relation matrix.

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18

C1 0 3.5 4 3 3 0 0 4 4 0.5 5 1.5 2 3 0 2.5 4 3.5

C2 3.5 0 5 2.5 4 1.5 1 4 3.5 1 3 2 3 3.5 0 3 4.5 4
C3 0 0 0 0.5 3 0 0 2 5 0.5 5 1 0.5 0 0 3 1.5 1.5
C4 0 2 1.5 0 4 0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5 0.5 2.5 1 0.5 1.5 0 3 4.5 3.5
C5 0.5 0 1 1.5 0 0 0.5 3 5 2 5 1.5 0 0 0 3.5 3 3
C6 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 4.5 0 4 0 0 0 0 1.5 2.5 1
C7 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0.5 4.5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0.5 1.5 0.5
C8 0 1 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 4.5 2.5 4.5 3.5 2 2 0 3 0 0.5
C9 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.5 2.5 1 1.5 1 0 2 2 1.5
C10 0 0.5 0 0.5 1 0 0 5 3.5 0 5 2 1 1.5 0 4 1.5 1
C11 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 2 4.5 0 0 2 1.5 2 0 3 1 1.5
C12 0 0 1.5 0.5 1.5 0 0 1 2.5 1.5 3 0 2.5 1.5 0 4 2.5 2
C13 1 0.5 1.5 1.5 0 0 0 2.5 3.5 1.5 3.5 1 0 3 0 2 1 4.5
C14 0 1.5 2 0.5 0.5 0 0 3 3.5 1 4 0.5 2 0 0 3 1.5 3
C15 0 0 0.5 0 1 0 0 3.5 4.5 0 4.5 0 0 0 0 4 1 1
C16 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.5 2.5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1.5
C17 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 0.5 0.5 3 2.5 0 0 0 4 0 3.5
C18 1.5 1 1 1 0.5 0 0 2.5 2 0 3 0.5 0 0 0 3 2.5 0

that the influence of these risk factors on other factors is less than
the influence that others impose on themselves. As summarized in
Table 5, all of the government and financial risks with positive
“ReC” value are in the cause group, whereas operation risks with
negative value are in the effect group. Therefore, it means that
government and financial risks significantly affect other factors,
while the operation risks are prominently influenced by other
factors, which is in line with real conditions.
Prominence “R þ C” represents the importance of each factor in
the overall analysis structure. The prominence of the 18 risk factors
rank from the largest to the smallest as follows: C11, C9, C2, C8, C16,
C18, C17, C1, C12, C14, C5, C13, C4, C10, C3, C6, C7, C15. In the view of the
“R þ C” value, eleven critical risk factors from the cause group can
be attained in order: government intervention (C2) > inadequate
supervision system (C1) > unclear boundary of catchment area
(C14) > immature law and regulations (C5) > project fragmentation
(C13) > government default (C4) > lack of technical ability
(C10) > project approval and licensing delays (C3) > inflation
(C6) > exchange rate (C7) > force majeure (C15).
4.2. Discussion
The present study unveils that 18 risk factors are identified in
the Sponge City PPP projects in China. Observed by the nature of
the PPP projects, there are involved in general risk factors,
encompassing government intervention, financing and the ability
of private capital, which is consistent with the research on risk
factors in Chinese PPP projects (Xu et al., 2010) and Indian road
system PPP projects (Boeing Singh and Kalidindi, 2006). Further-
more, the specific risks can appear in different fields of PPP projects.
According to the research findings, the Sponge City PPP projects are
greatly affected by the risks from unclear boundary of catchment
area and project fragmentation. Therefore, it is necessary for pro-
moting the “Sponge City pilot projects” in several cities. Up to
recently, in China, the first batch of 16 pilot cities were selected in
2015 and the second batch of 14 pilot cities were selected in 2016,
respectively. Followed by the strategy of “learning-by -doing”, pilot
projects can contribute to gain rich experiences and share in more
cities in the future (Jiang et al., 2018).
In the term of the value of “R þ C” for each risk factor, time delay
(C11) and cost overrunning (C9) rank the first and the second, while
the cause degree of them is negative. Thus, it suggests that time
delay and cost overrunning are significantly influenced by other
risk factors, which is in line with the reality that delays in project
approval and licensing, immature law and regulations, and force
majeure would lead to project delays and cost overrunning.
Therefore, time delay and cost overrunning are not the critical
factors.

Table 5
Cause and effect values.

R (Effect degree) C (Affected degree) R þ C (Prominence) ReC (Cause degree)

C1 1.637 0.257 1.894 1.380

C2 1.824 0.438 2.262 1.386
C3 0.800 0.562 1.362 0.238
C4 1.073 0.412 1.485 0.661
C5 1.009 0.625 1.634 0.384
C6 0.626 0.133 0.759 0.493
C7 0.471 0.21 0.681 0.261
C8 0.852 1.369 2.221 0.517
C9 0.481 2.122 2.603 1.641
C10 0.921 0.515 1.436 0.406
C11 0.648 2.138 2.786 1.490
C12 0.832 0.876 1.708 0.044
C13 0.976 0.655 1.631 0.321
C14 0.929 0.716 1.645 0.213
C15 0.655 0 0.655 0.655
C16 0.320 1.817 2.137 1.497
C17 0.673 1.223 1.896 0.550
C18 0.679 1.337 2.016 0.658
956 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958
2.000
1.500 C1
C2
1.000
C4
0.500 C6
C10 C13
C3 C5 C7
0.000 C12
0 5 10
-0.500 C8
-1.000
-1.500 C11
C9
-2.000
Fig. 3. Scatter plot of the cause degree.
Government intervention (C2) places the third in the list due to
the maximum value of “R” and “ReC”. It indicates that government
intervention plays the greatest influence on others, which has been
recognized as one of the most important risks, and is also difficult
to change. The possible reasons may be that the direct interference
from the government in the process of construction and operation
in PPP projects will restrict the right of the private capital to freely
make decision. For example, the MOF has issued the “PPP Project
Contract Guide (Trial)” in December 2014, which stipulated that
government and its affiliated institutions can neither possess equal
to or more than 50% of equity ratio in the PPP Special Purpose
Vehicle (SPV), nor enjoy the actual control and management power.
Nonetheless, the private capital don’t fully avoid government
intervention behavior in effect. Because of the path dependence on
the centralized administrative authority system, it is difficult avoid
government intervention in the short term (Zhang et al., 2007).
Additionally, many government agencies are involved in SC pro-
jects, for instance landscape planning, construction, municipal,
water, transportation, financing, environmental protection, and so
on. They can further result in more government intervention
behavior. Thus, government intervention is the most critical risk
factor in the Sponge City PPP projects.
In addition to government intervention (C2), the other four top
risk factors listed in the cause group include inadequate supervi-
sion system (C1), unclear boundary of catchment area (C14),
immature law and regulations (C5), and project fragmentation (C13),
based on the value of “R þ C”. Evidently, three factors (C1, C2, and C5)
are from government risks category and two factors (C13 and C14)
are from construction risks category. It demonstrates that the
critical first-level risk factors in the Sponge City PPP projects arise
from the aspects of government and construction.
Due to transitions from a highly centralized planned economy in
China, it is obvious that government institutions are immature in
furnishing the favorable support environment (Ke et al., 2010).
Therefore, inadequate supervision (C1) risks can also appear in
Sponge City PPP projects. In line with this finding, Adams et al.
(2006) also concluded that lack of an effective PPP supervision
system in China was perceived as one critical factor hindering the
execution of the PPP projects. With respect to immature law and
regulations (C5), more attention have been paid by the government.
Although Chinese government have launched more than 50 man-
agement regulations, systematic law and regulations in the national
C15
C14
Cause degree R-C
15 20
C17
C18
C16
level is still missing to regulate management practices in the life
cycle of PPP projects (Wang et al., 2017). Evidenced from the similar
research, Osei-Kyei and Chan (2015) concluded that favorable legal
frameworks was on critical success factors (CSFs) for PPP projects.
In summary, government intervention (C2), inadequate supervision
system (C1), and immature law and regulations (C5) are considered
the critical factors in implementing Sponge City PPP projects.
For construction risks (C13, C14), the process of constructing the
SC projects always requires complex, innovative and comprehen-
sive multiple subsystems to attain the targets of green public
infrastructure. They include underground comprehensive corri-
dors, rainwater disposal, urban renewal and commercial real estate
development, which is typically more complex than the traditional
infrastructure projects (Gao, 2017). Moreover, all of subsystems are
interrelated and interacted. Hence, there are more construction
risks occurred in the Sponge City PPP projects. Given the different
hydrogeological conditions in different areas, the normative
guidelines suitable for each city have not been timely established,
which can also induce more construction risks. Echoed with the
findings, Jia et al. (2016) studied the barriers and challenges of LID
in Sponge City and found that individual SC project in the different
climate, geographical, hydrological and soil conditions can’t
completely apply the same technical specifications. Specifically, SC
projects are characterized with project fragmentation, which im-
plies that the success of Sponge City PPP projects must achieve the
targets of improving regional effects. Referred to actual practices in
the first and second batches of SC pilot projects in China, the project
fragmentation (C13) risk has been gradually uncovered by the in-
dustry professionals. Unclear boundary of catchment area (C14) is
another critical risk factor. Compared with other water resource
infrastructure, such as the sewage treatment plant with clear
boundary conditions, the Sponge City PPP projects involve
comprehensive design and planning of ecological environment
upgrading as well as the urban regeneration. Because of system-
aticness and uniqueness of SC projects, there is lack of an unclear
boundary division between the subprojects. Integrated with the
barriers of intersecting and complicated construction system of
Sponge City PPP projects, both project fragmentation and unclear
boundary of catchment area can even incur extra risks in the
operation stage as well as PPP performance assessment process.
The present study indicates that financing risks and operation
risks are not regarded as the critical risk factors. As for financing
 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958
risks, there are influenced by inflation or interest rates, which
cannot be controlled or even foreseen. The possible reasons may be
that there is well financial market or availability of financial in-
strument because of Chinese impressive economic growth in the
recent decades. (Mei et al., 2018) Moreover, the consortium,
comprising construction enterprises, manufacturing enterprises,
facility operators as well as financial institutions to enhance
comprehensive management capacities is encouraged to cooperate
in China. Taking a successful PPP infrastructure project, Beijing
Metro Line 4, as example, after the competition among investors
led by Beijing Transport Commission, Beijing Jing gang Metro
Company Limited (PPP) was established by Beijing Investment
Corporation, Hong Kong Metro Corporation and Beijing Capital
Group in Beijing Metro Line 4 PPP project. Each party performed its
duties in the process of project execution. The project was divided
into two parts: civil engineering and equipment. The civil engi-
neering participators were in charge of Line 4, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Beijing Investment Corporation, and the equipment
participators were in charge of the PPP Company. Thus, the con-
sortium can make the financing risks reduce to some extent.
As for operation risks, most of projects are currently in the
process of planning or construction. Therefore, operation risks in
operating income, payment mechanism and responsibility alloca-
tion have not significantly emerged. Additional, due to the nature of
public products and strong social welfare of SC projects, the local
government primarily sponsor the investment. Thus, private capital
may suffer from less risk events in investment payoff. Furthermore,
private capital is encouraged to engage innovative activities by the
local government. Take the Sponge City PPP projects in Jinan as
example, located in the Eastern China, it is one of the first batch SC
pilot projects. Business resources in each catchment area of SC
projects, such as landscaping, parking, advertising. etc., can be
sufficiently utilized by the private capital. In this way, additional
economic benefits can be gained to share the governmental
financial pressure. Therefore, operation risks are not regarded as
the critical factors in this research.
5. Conclusion and policy implication
The construction of SC projects can effectively solve the series of
problems in rainwater flood, surface runoff, and water pollution
and is perceived as a feasible measure for achieving the sustainable
urbanization. The PPP financing mode with remarkable advantages
has been chosen for the SC projects to bridge the huge investment
gap. Nevertheless, it is essential to investigate the critical risk fac-
tors in advance. In the present research, the risk factors are cate-
gorized into as 4 first-level risk factors and 18 s-level risk factors
through literature review, brainstorming and expert interview. Five
critical risk factors, namely, inadequate supervision system (C1),
government intervention (C2), immature law and regulations (C5),
project fragmentation (C13), and unclear boundary of catchment
area (C14), in Sponge City PPP project have been obtained from the
DEMATEL method. In response to these risks, the following four
measures are proposed.
Firstly, with the holistic view, government must establish suit-
able governance framework for Sponge City PPP projects to
improve law and supervision system, strengthen planning guid-
ance, formulate systematic urban planning. More specifically, local
government should establish detailed administrative provisions,
and stipulate special planning for systematic roads, green space and
water infrastructure. Moreover, government should intervene the
activities of construction and operation as little as possible as to
motivate the private capital, who have advantages in advanced
technology, mature management experiences, and exploring
innovative business model.
957
Secondly, local government must revise and improve the stan-
dards, norms, and technical requirements for SC construction to
avoid the construction risks. Because SC projects construction in
each city mainly depends on the local climate, rainfall, ecology as
well as the social and economic factors. The advanced information
technology in construction industry, such as Building Information
Modelling can be adopted from integral planning to the construc-
tion and operation stage. It can contribute to the information
sharing as well as collision detection, and then reduce the risks
caused by project fragment.
Thirdly, the constructive partner relationship must be main-
tained between the government and the best private capital to
reduce the transaction cost. The suitable private capital is chosen by
the criteria of reliable reputation, sufficient funds, advanced tech-
nology and rich experience. Furthermore, the arrangement must
stipulate the way of loss compensation in case that government
break the contract. Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC)
arrangement can be recommended to coordinate the activities of
planning, design, construction, financing investment, operation
and maintenance in the whole life cycle.
Finally, the project boundary conditions of SC must be as explicit
as possible to efficiently establish the payment mechanism and
performance evaluation criteria. It is vital that government au-
thority to integrate adjacent projects including the new and
existing projects into the whole package in SC projects. Compared
with the existing retrofitted projects, profit-driven private capital is
keen on the new projects. In order to achieve the whole upgrading
effect, SC projects can be integrated with the same watershed and
catchment area, no matter the new or existing projects according to
their own geographical conditions. Each catchment zone covers the
combination of roads, sewage treatment, water system, land-
scaping, residential buildings, etc.
This study also has several shortcomings. In the future studies,
the DEMATEL method can be improved to consider the weight of
each risk factor. It can be aided by the method triangular fuzzy
evaluation or the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Moreover, the
empirical study of a large sample can be conducted further to verify
the result of this study.
Acknowledgments
This work was financially supported by Shandong Province So-
cial Science Foundation of China (Grant number 17CGLJ12), Jinan
Social Science Foundation of China (Grant number JNSK18DS12),
Shandong Province Department of Education (J17RB092, J14LN13),
Shandong Housing and Urban-Rural Development Department
(Grant number 2018-R1-03). The authors would also like to thank
the experts who contributed to the interviews and reviewed the
manuscript.
References
Adams, J., Young, A., Wu, Z., 2006. Public private partnerships in China: system,
constraints and future prospects. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag. 19 (4), 384e396.
An, X., Li, H., Wang, L., Wang, Z., Ding, J., Cao, Y., 2018. Compensation mechanism for
urban water environment treatment PPP project in China. J. Clean. Prod. 201,
246e253.
Bing, L., Akintoye, A., Edwards, P.J., Hardcastle, C., 2005. The allocation of risk in PPP/
PFI construction projects in the UK. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 23 (1), 25e35.
Boeing Singh, L., Kalidindi, S.N., 2006. Traffic revenue risk management through
Annuity Model of PPP road projects in India. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 24 (7), 605e613.
Carbonara, N., Costantino, N., Pellegrino, R., 2014. Concession period for PPPs: a
winewin model for a fair risk sharing. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32 (7), 1223e1232.
Chan, A.P.C., Yeung, J.F.Y., Yu, C.C.P., Wang, S.Q., Ke, Y., 2011. Empirical study of risk
assessment and allocation of public-private partnership projects in China.
J. Manag. Eng. 27 (3), 136e148.
Chan, F.K.S., Griffiths, J.A., Higgitt, D., Xu, S., Zhu, F., Tang, Y.-T., Xu, Y., Thorne, C.R.,
2018. “Sponge City” in Chinada breakthrough of planning and flood risk
management in the urban context. Land Use Pol. 76, 772e778.
958 L. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 226 (2019) 949e958
Chang, N.B., Rivera, B.J., Wanielista, M.P., 2011. Optimal design for water conserva-
tion and energy savings using green roofs in a green building under mixed
uncertainties. J. Clean. Prod. 19 (11), 1180e1188.
Cheng, C.L., 2003. Evaluating water conservation measures for green building in
Taiwan. Build. Environ. 38 (2), 369e379.
Choi, J.-h., Chung, J., Lee, D.-J., 2010. Risk perception analysis: participation in
China’s water PPP market. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 28 (6), 580e592.
Cruz, C.O., Rui, C.M., 2013. Flexible contracts to cope with uncertainty in
publiceprivate partnerships. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 31 (3), 473e483.
Cui, C., Liu, Y., Hope, A., Wang, J., 2018. Review of studies on the publiceprivate
partnerships (PPP) for infrastructure projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 36 (5),
773e794.
Dinçer, H., Ümit, H., Yüksel, S., 2017. Balanced scorecard based performance mea-
surement of European airlines using a hybrid multicriteria decision making
approach under the fuzzy environment. J. Air Transp. Manag. 63, 17e33.
Ellis, J.B., Lundy, L., 2016. Implementing sustainable drainage systems for urban
surface water management within the regulatory framework in England and
Wales. J. Environ. Manag. 183, 630e636.


Erdogan, S.A., Saparauskas, J., Turskis, Z., 2017. Decision making in construction
management: AHP and expert choice approach. Procedia. Eng 172, 270e276.
Finance, M.o., 2015. Announcement on National Financial Support for Pilot Sponge
City Development. (Accessed 20 April 2017).
Fletcher, T.D., Shuster, W., Hunt, W.F., Ashley, R., Butler, D., Arthur, S., Trowsdale, S.,
Barraud, S., Semadeni-Davies, A., Bertrand-Krajewski, J.L., 2018. SUDS, LID,
BMPs, WSUD and more e the evolution and application of terminology sur-
rounding urban drainage. Urban Water J. 12 (7), 525e542.
Gao, L., 2017. Risk Management of Sponge City PPP Project in China. Yunnan Uni-
versity of Finance and Economics (in Chinese).
Grimsey, D., Lewis, M.K., 2002. Evaluating the risks of public private partnerships
for infrastructure projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 20 (2), 107e118.
Hwang, B.-G., Zhao, X., Gay, M.J.S., 2013. Public private partnership projects in
Singapore: factors, critical risks and preferred risk allocation from the
perspective of contractors. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 31 (3), 424e433.
Ice, G., 2004. History of innovative best management practice development and its
role in addressing water quality limited waterbodies. J. Environ. Eng. 130 (6),
684e689.
Jia, H., W, Z., Yu, S.L., 2016. Opportunity and challenge:China’s sponge city plan.
Hydrolink 4, 100e102.
Jiang, Y., Zevenbergen, C., Ma, Y., 2018. Urban pluvial flooding and stormwater
management: a contemporary review of China’s challenges and “sponge cities”
strategy. Environ. Sci. Policy 80, 132e143.
Jin, X.-H., Zhang, G., 2011. Modelling optimal risk allocation in PPP projects using
artificial neural networks. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 29 (5), 591e603.
Ke, Y., Wang, S., Chan, A.P.C., Lam, P.T.I., 2010. Preferred risk allocation in China’s
publiceprivate partnership (PPP) projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 28 (5), 482e492.
Kumar, L., Jindal, A., Velaga, N.R., 2018. Financial risk assessment and modelling of
PPP based Indian highway infrastructure projects. Transport Pol. 62, 2e11.
Lang, Q., Xu, D., Li, L., 2017. Study on risk sharing mechanism of Sponge City PPP
project. Management and Administration (11), 141e144 (in Chinese).
Li, H., Ding, L., Ren, M., Li, C., Wang, H., 2017. Sponge city construction in China: a
survey of the challenges and opportunities. Water 9 (9), 594.
Liu, A., Guan, Y., Egodawatta, P., Goonetilleke, A., 2016. Selecting rainfall events for
effective water sensitive urban design: a case study in gold coast city, Australia.
Ecol. Eng. 92, 67e72.
Liu, X., 2017. Risk research on PPP mode of infrastructure construction – the case
study of urban sewage treatment plant. Finance Econ. (10), 126e128 (in
Chinese).
Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kharb, R.K., Mangla, S.K., 2016. Evaluating the enablers in
solar power developments in the current scenario using fuzzy DEMATEL: an
Indian perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 63, 379e397.
Mei, C., Liu, J., Wang, H., Yang, Z., Ding, X., Shao, W., 2018. Integrated assessments of
green infrastructure for flood mitigation to support robust decision-making for
sponge city construction in an urbanized watershed. Sci. Total Environ. 639,
1394e1407.
Moles, P., Williams, G., 1995. Privately funded infrastructure in the UK: participants’
risk in the Skye Bridge project. Transport Pol. 2 (2), 129e134.
Ng, A., Loosemore, M., 2007. Risk allocation in the private provision of public
infrastructure. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25 (1), 66e76.
Osei-Kyei, R., Chan, A.P.C., 2015. Review of studies on the critical success factors for
publiceprivate partnership (PPP) projects from 1990 to 2013. Int. J. Proj. Manag.
33 (6), 1335e1346.
Pandey, A., Kumar, A., 2017. Commentary on “Evaluating the criteria for human
resource for science and technology (HRST) based on an integrated fuzzy AHP
and fuzzy DEMATEL approach”. Appl. Soft Comput. 51, 351e352.
Qin, H.P., Li, Z.X., Fu, G.T., 2013. The effects of low impact development on urban
flooding under different rainfall characteristics. J. Environ. Manag. 129,
577e585.
Riccio, L.J., 2014. Public-private partnerships:pitfalls and possibilities. Publ. Adm.
Rev. 74 (1), 50e51.
Sara, J., Stikkelman, R.M., Herder, P.M., 2015. Assessing relative importance and
mutual influence of barriers for CCS deployment of the ROAD project using AHP
and DEMATEL methods. Int. J. Green. Gas. Con. 41, 336e357.
Seyed-Hosseini, S.M., Safaei, N., Asgharpour, M.J., 2006. Reprioritization of failures
in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and
evaluation laboratory technique. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 91 (8), 872e881.
Shieh, J.I., Wu, H.H., Huang, K.K., 2010. A DEMATEL method in identifying key
success factors of hospital service quality. Knowl-Based. Syst. 23 (3), 277e282.
Shrestha, A., Chan, T.K., Aibinu, A.A., Chen, C., 2017. Efficient risk transfer in PPP
wastewater treatment projects. Util. Pol. 48, 132e140.
Spackman, M., 2002. Publiceprivate partnerships: lessons from the British
approach. Econ. Syst. 26 (3), 283e301.
Tanik, A., 2006. Determination of land-use change in an urbanized district of
Istanbul via remote sensing analysis. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 15 (8), 798e805.
Thorne, C.R., Lawson, E.C., Ozawa, C., Hamlin, S.L., Smith, L.A., 2018. Overcoming
uncertainty and barriers to adoption of Blue-Green Infrastructure for urban
flood risk management. J. Flood. Risk. Manag. 6 (11), 1e13.
Tong, Y., Long, R., Cui, X., Zhu, D., Hong, C., 2017. Application of the publiceprivate
partnership model to urban sewage treatment. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 1065e1074.
Tseng, M.-L., 2009. A causal and effect decision making model of service quality
expectation using grey-fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (4),
7738e7748.
Tzeng, G.H., Chiang, C.H., Li, C.W., 2007. Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning
programs: a novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL.
Expert Syst. Appl. 32 (4), 1028e1044.
Uygun, O.,€ Kaçamak, H., Kahraman, Ü.A., 2015. An integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy
ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a
telecommunication company. Comput. Ind. Eng. 86, 137e146.
Wang, H., Mei, C., Liu, J., Shao, W., 2018. A new strategy for integrated urban water
management in China: sponge city. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 61 (3), 317e329.
Wang, Y., Sun, M., Song, B., 2017. Public perceptions of and willingness to pay for
sponge city initiatives in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 122, 11e20.
Wu, W.W., Lee, Y.T., 2007. Developing global managers’ competencies using the
fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Syst. Appl. 32 (2), 499e507.
Wu, Y., Xu, C., Li, L., Wang, Y., Chen, K., Xu, R., 2018. A risk assessment framework of
PPP waste-to-energy incineration projects in China under 2-dimension lin-
guistic environment. J. Clean. Prod. 183, 602e617.
Wu, Z., Li, H., Feng, Y., Luo, X., Chen, Q., 2019. Developing a green building evalu-
ation standard for interior decoration: a case study of China. Build. Environ. 152,
50e58.
Wu, Z., Yu, A.T.W., Shen, L., 2017. Investigating the determinants of contractor’s
construction and demolition waste management behavior in Mainland China.
Waste Manag. 60, 290e300.
Xia, J., Zhang, Y., Xiong, L., He, S., Wang, L., Yu, Z., 2017. Opportunities and challenges
of the Sponge City construction related to urban water issues in China. Sci.
China Earth Sci. 60 (4), 652e658.
Xu, C., Hong, J., Jia, H., Liang, S., Xu, T., 2017. Life cycle environmental and economic
assessment of a LID-BMP treatment train system: a case study in China. J. Clean.
Prod. 149, 227e237.
Xu, Y., Chan, A.P.C., Xia, B., Qian, Q.K., Liu, Y., Peng, Y., 2015. Critical risk factors
affecting the implementation of PPP waste-to-energy projects in China. Appl.
Energy 158, 403e411.
Xu, Y., Yeung, J.F.Y., Chan, A.P.C., Chan, D.W.M., Wang, S.Q., Ke, Y., 2010. Developing a
risk assessment model for PPP projects in China d a fuzzy synthetic evaluation
approach. Autom. ConStruct. 19 (7), 929e943.
Yuan, J., Li, W., Guo, J., Zhao, X., Skibniewski, M.J., 2018. Social risk factors of
transportation PPP projects in China: a sustainable development perspective.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15 (7), 1323.
Zhan, Q., Wei, Z., Zhao, B., 2017. A hybrid human and organizational analysis
method for railway accidents based on HFACS-Railway Accidents (HFACS-RAs).
Saf. Sci. 91, 232e250.
Zhang, H., Xu, X., Zhou, Y., 2007. The development of international rural tourism and
its reference to China. Hum. Geogr. (4), 82e85 (in Chinese).
Zhang, L., Zhang, W., 2012. A case study of water conservation evaluate for green
building. In: Advanced Materials Research. Trans. Tech. Publ., pp. 62e65
Zhao, Y., 2017. Study on Risk Evaluation and Measures of Engineering Project inPPP
Mode-Based on Fuzzy Integrated Evaluation. Shandong University (in Chinese).