Governance of Major Public Investment Projects: Principles and Practices in Six Countries

Abstract

This article compares the Norwegian scheme for quality assurance of major public projects with similar project governance schemes in five other OECD countries. 1 All schemes have been introduced since the turn of the millennium and seem to be fairly consistent with recommendations from the project management literature. There are also a number of differences between the six schemes, for example, with regard to parties and roles, comprehensiveness, flexibility, organization, and whether portfolio management is covered. It is too early to make conclusions about their relative effects, but the evidence thus far indicates that there is much to learn across countries.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 57 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.