Project participants, through experience, have an initial perception and predisposition towards risk and the types of risks they are willing and able to undertake. This is equally true for parties interested in public–private partnership (PPP) projects. These initial positions have been registered for the major Greek PPP market stakeholders potentially involved in a PPP arrangement through a survey covering all candidate construction companies, interested financing institutes and a number of public sector entities to be involved in PPPs. Findings revealed that stakeholders were, for the majority of risks identified, in agreement as to preferred risk allocation. Risk allocation preferences for construction companies were compared with similar findings for the UK, a mature PPP market, indicating a possible learning/maturing process based on the particular country background. Conclusions add to other surveys carried out on the subject and should enable public sector clients to establish a more efficient framework for risk allocation, thus reducing negotiations prior to contract award and minimizing the risk of poor risk distribution.

Transport infrastructure public private partnership (PPP) projects are very diverse and complex in nature not only because of their mode-specific intricacies but also because of their inherent economic characteristics that relate to the scope of involvement of the private sector in the project, the large sunk costs incurred, and ultimately, the competition to which these projects are exposed. The allocation of revenue risk is of paramount importance for the successful implementation of such projects and a sub-optimal allocation may lead to project structuring that is unnecessarily expensive and vulnerable to failure. At the same time, the revenue risk depends critically on the remuneration model used (user-based versus budget-based) and may, in turn, take the form of demand risk, counterparty risk or combinations of the two. This review explores the issues related to revenue risk allocation for transport infrastructure PPP projects. Overarching principles for the allocation of revenue risk that transcend mode-specificity are identified and compared to case studies generated in the context of the COST Action TU1001. The results show that theory and practice are divergent, leading to sub-optimal structuring and exposing projects to potential failure.

The maritime and port sector is widely considered conservative concerning the ability to introduce innovation in respect to other industries. This may be due to the lack of cooperative interactions among the several players involved. It does not mean that innovation does not occur in this industry. Along with some technical innovations, managerial, organizational, and cultural innovations also take place in the sector. The literature has considered the assessment and effects of the adoption of particular innovation, but still few studies underline the innovation path in a broad sense with a specific focus on terminal operators. The present article aims at filling this gap through a field analysis grouping together case studies developed in different world regions and examining the adoption path of innovation through a mix of three different techniques (i.e. the H- and I-indexes, a Systems of Innovation Analysis, and a Qualitative Comparative Analysis). Research outcomes underline how, even if no unique recipe for success can be found, specific factors (e.g. a ranking of innovation objectives, coordination among actors, and institutions) can influence the achievement of success. The analyses allow suggesting strategic and policy advice that may help link in a better way the innovation drivers with their actual effects.

The port sector is often perceived to be lagging behind in terms of innovative initiatives. It is unclear whether this is the result of a more limited engagement of the scientific community, or poor external marketing from port operators or whether the limited number of port-related scientific studies is not representative of the real volume of innovation in the sector. In order to offer deeper insight into the connections between the academic (port) innovation literature and actual innovation practices in the port sector, firstly, the literature is reviewed over the 2011–2018 period. Secondly, the paper proposes a typology, which supports the management of the innovation process and upon which future research could be based. Last, the analysis of 75 port-related innovation initiatives provides an application of the proposed typology. The findings from the study of innovation in the port-related sectors show that multi-dimensional innovation encompassing technological, managerial, organisational and cultural aspects is prevailing in this industry. So far only a handful of innovation cases are the result of co-operation, generally with other firms upstream or downstream in the maritime supply chain. Ultimately, it emerges, however, that collaborative innovation or co-innovation is the way forward for future maritime- and port-related innovation.