Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Bowe, D. Lee (2004)
Project evaluation in the presence of multiple embedded real options: evidence from the Taiwan High-Speed Rail ProjectJournal of Asian Economics, 15
B. Ashuri, W. Rouse, D. Bodner (2008)
A Real-Options Approach to Modeling Investments in Competitive, Dynamic Retail MarketsProceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008)
Wayne Winston (2008)
Financial Models Using Simulation and Optimization II: Investment Valuation, Options Pricing, Real Options, & Product Pricing Models
D. Banister (2005)
Unsustainable Transport: City Transport in the New Century
Jens Bengtsson (2001)
Manufacturing flexibility and real options: A reviewInternational Journal of Production Economics, 74
S. Myers (1977)
Determinants of corporate borrowingJournal of Financial Economics, 5
Lara Greden, L. Glicksman, Gabriel Lopez-Betanzos (2006)
A Real Options Methodology for Evaluating Risk and Opportunity of Natural VentilationJournal of Solar Energy Engineering-transactions of The Asme, 128
B. Ashuri (2010)
VALUATION OF FLEXIBLE LEASES FOR CORPORATE TENANTS FACING UNCERTAINTY IN THEIR REQUIRED WORKSPACEInternational Journal of Strategic Property Management, 14
Timothy Irwin (2003)
Public Money for Private Infrastructure: Deciding When to Offer Guarantees, Output-Based Subsidies, and Other Forms of Fiscal Support
A. Borison (2005)
Real Options Analysis: Where Are the Emperor's Clothes?Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 17
B. Ashuri, W.B. Rouse, D.A. Bodner
A real options approach to investment decisions in competitive, dynamic retail markets
M. Garvin, C. Cheah (2004)
Valuation techniques for infrastructure investment decisionsConstruction Management and Economics, 22
R. Bain, Ľ. Polakovič (2005)
Traffic forecasting risk study update 2005: through ramp-up and beyond
David Ford, Diane Lander, J. Voyer (2002)
A real options approach to valuing strategic flexibility in uncertain construction projectsConstruction Management and Economics, 20
F. Black, Myron Scholes (1973)
The Pricing of Options and Corporate LiabilitiesJournal of Political Economy, 81
C. Cheah, Jicai Liu (2006)
Valuing governmental support in infrastructure projects as real options using Monte Carlo simulationConstruction Management and Economics, 24
Eduardo Schwartz, A. Dixit, R. Pindyck (1994)
Investment Under Uncertainty.Journal of Finance, 49
D. Bodner, W. Rouse (2007)
Understanding R&D value creation with organizational simulationSystems Engineering, 10
Z. Mayer, V. Kazakidis (2007)
Decision Making in Flexible Mine Production System Design Using Real OptionsJournal of Construction Engineering and Management-asce, 133
R. Bain, L. Polakovic
Traffic forecasting risk study update 2005: through ramp‐up and beyond, Standard & Poor's, London
Lara Greden, L. Glicksman (2005)
A real options model for valuing flexible spaceJournal of Corporate Real Estate, 7
L. Brandão, Eduardo Saraiva (2008)
The option value of government guarantees in infrastructure projectsConstruction Management and Economics, 26
J. Hull (1989)
Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives
S. Ho, Liang Liu (2002)
An option pricing-based model for evaluating the financial viability of privatized infrastructure projectsConstruction Management and Economics, 20
J. Cox, S. Ross, M. Rubinstein. (1979)
Option pricing: A simplified approach☆Journal of Financial Economics, 7
Purpose – This paper aims to present a financial valuation framework based on the real options theory to evaluate investments in toll road projects delivered under the two‐phase development plan. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is based on applying the real options theory to evaluate investments in toll road projects. In particular, the risk‐neutral valuation method is used for pricing flexibility embedded in the two‐phase development plan. Risk‐neutral binomial lattice is used to model traffic uncertainty and to find the optimal time for the toll road expansion. Probabilistic life cycle cost and revenue analysis is conducted to characterize the investor's financial risk profile and determine the flexibility value of the expansion option. Findings – The flexible, two‐phase development plan can improve the investor's financial risk profile in the toll road project through limiting the downside risk of overinvestment (i.e. decreasing the probability of investment loss) and increasing the expected investment value in a highway project. Social implications – Private and public sectors can benefit from this valuation framework and use tax dollars and users' fees effectively through avoiding overinvestment in toll road projects. Originality/value – The framework consists of several integrated features, which distinguish it from existing investment valuation models. The risk‐neutral valuation method for pricing flexibility embedded in the two‐phase development plan is applied. This real options framework is capable of characterizing traffic boundary, at which it is optimal for the investor to expand the toll road. Further, this framework provides the likelihood distribution of when the investor may expand the toll road.
Built Environment Project and Asset Management – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jul 8, 2011
Keywords: Toll road; Two‐phase development plan; Real options analysis; Risk‐neutral valuation method; Binomial lattice; Optimal expansion time; Flexibility; Expansion option; Road transport; Financial risk
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.