前言

　　随着全球化进程的加快与基础设施进一步互联互通，国际工程项目正在以前所未有的规模与深度展开。无论是跨国铁路、深海港口，抑或是智慧城市、新能源基地，这些工程不仅是钢筋水泥的构筑，更是资本、技术、管理与风险的集合体。面对动辄数十亿美元的投资、跨越多国的法律环境、长达数十年的运营周期，如何选择合适的管理模式，已成为决定项目成败的首要战略问题。不一样的管理模式意味着不同的风险分配、融资结构、权责关系以及价值创造逻辑。本文旨在系统梳理并对比分析国际工程领域中的五大主流管理模式——PPP、EPC、BOT、PFI、DBO，并为项目决策者提供一份清晰的选择方案。

　　Introduction

　　With the accelerated pace of globalization and the further interconnection of infrastructure, international engineering projects are unfolding on an unprecedented scale and depth. Whether it be cross-border railways, deep-water ports, smart cities, or new energy bases, these projects are not merely structures of steel and concrete, but also intricate assemblies of capital, technology, management, and risk. Faced with investments that often amount to tens of billions of dollars, legal environments spanning multiple countries, and operational cycles lasting decades, selecting the appropriate management model has become a primary strategic issue determining the success or failure of a project. Different management models entail distinct risk allocations, financing structures, responsibility relationships, and value-creation logics. This paper aims to systematically organize and comparatively analyze the five mainstream management models in the field of international engineering—PPP, EPC, BOT, PFI, and DBO—providing project decision-makers with a clear selection framework.

　　一、模式解析与选择

　　(一)PPP模式：广义的政企合作框架

　　PPP(Public-Private Partnership)，公私合作伙伴关系，是一个涵盖多种具体形式的广义概念。它是政府与社会资本在基础设施及公共服务领域的长期契约式合作，核心是风险共担、利益共享、全生命周期协作，合同期通常20-30年，旨在利用私营部门的资金、效率和技术，更好地提供公共产品或服务。

　　1. Model Analysis and Selection

　　1.1PPP Model: A Broad Framework for Public-Private Cooperation

　　PPP (Public-Private Partnership), or public-private partnership, is a broad concept encompassing various specific forms. It refers to a long-term contractual cooperation between the government and social capital in the fields of infrastructure and public services, with the core of risk sharing, benefit sharing, and full-lifecycle collaboration. Typically spanning 20-30 years, the contract aims to leverage the capital, efficiency, and technology of the private sector to better provide public goods or services.

　　该模式通过系统性的风险最优分配原则(而非简单转移)，将设计、融资、建设、运营等环节整合，旨在实现项目全生命周期综合效益最大化。其典型结构通常包含私营部门承担项目投资、建设、融资与运营和技术等风险，而公共部门则提供政策支持并承担购买服务模式下的绩效付费，政府在PPP模式中承担政策、法律变更、土地征用等风险，并提供政策支持文件的制定以及项目运行的监管，以充分体现公共部门在PPP模式的优位性，发挥该模式“公益保护”的目的与宗旨。

　　Guided by the principle of optimal systematic risk allocation (rather than simple transfer), this model integrates design, financing, construction, operation and other links, targeting the maximization of comprehensive benefits throughout the project’s full lifecycle. Its typical structure usually involves the private sector assuming risks related to project investment, construction, financing, operation, and technology, while the public sector provides policy support and undertakes performance-based payments under the service purchase model. The government bears risks such as policy and legal changes, and land acquisition in the PPP model, and is responsible for formulating policy support documents and supervising project operation—fully reflecting the primacy of the public sector and fulfilling the model’s purpose of "public welfare protection."

　　但是该模式存在交易成本高昂、对政府监管能力要求极高、长期合作中易出现风险回流，且项目稳定性受政策与经济环境影响显著等弊端。

　　However, this model is plagued by drawbacks such as high transaction costs, exceptionally high demands on government regulatory capabilities, a tendency for risk to flow back during long-term cooperation, and significant susceptibility of project stability to policy and economic environmental influences.

　　(二)EPC模式：一体化交付的效率之选

　　EPC(Engineering, Procurement, Construction)，即设计、采购、施工总承包，是一种典型的“交钥匙”工程模式。在此模式下，业主将项目的绝大部分责任与风险转移给单一的总承包商。该总承包商负责从工程设计、设备材料采购到施工安装的全部环节，最终向业主交付一个完整且可立即投入使用的设施。

　　1.2EPC Model: An Efficient Choice for Integrated Delivery

　　EPC (Engineering, Procurement, Construction), which stands for design, procurement, and construction turnkey contracting, is a classic "turnkey" project model. Under this model, the client transfers the vast majority of project responsibilities and risks to a single general contractor. This contractor is responsible for all stages from engineering design, equipment and material procurement to construction and installation, ultimately delivering to the client a complete facility that is ready for immediate use.

　　该模式的核心特征体现为责任的集中化与风险的转移化：业主仅与单一总承包商签订合同，由该承包商承担从工程设计、设备采购到施工安装的全链条责任，并以固定总价或固定单价为基础，在约定期限内向业主交付符合合同规定的、具备完整使用功能的工程项目。这种 “交钥匙” 式的交付方式，通过将技术、成本与进度的主要风险转移至承包商，显著降低了业主的管理负担与不确定性，尤其适用于技术标准明确、范围定义清晰的工业与基础设施项目。

　　The core characteristics of this model are reflected in centralized responsibility and risk transfer: the owner signs a contract with only a single general contractor, who assumes full-chain responsibilities from engineering design, equipment procurement to construction and installation. Based on a lump-sum fixed price or fixed unit price, the contractor delivers an engineering project that meets contractual requirements and has complete operational functions to the owner within the agreed timeframe. This "turnkey" delivery method significantly reduces the owner’s management burden and uncertainty by transferring the main risks of technology, cost, and schedule to the contractor, and is particularly suitable for industrial and infrastructure projects with clear technical standards and well-defined scopes.

　　该模式的局限性主要体现为：业主在项目执行过程中对技术细节和工程实施的控制权被显著削弱;其对项目前期要求的明确性极为苛刻，需求定义的任何模糊都可能引发后期变更与争议;固定总价机制在锁定成本的同时，可能促使承包商为追求利润而采用低成本技术或材料，潜在牺牲工程长期质量与性能;此外，该模式缺乏对项目全生命周期成本的考虑，承包商仅对合同期内的交付成果负责，而不关注设施后期运营维护的经济性与便利性，可能造成业主长期运营负担加重。因此，该模式的有效实施强烈依赖于严谨的合同条款、业主的强监管能力及承包商的履约诚信。

　　The limitations of this model are primarily reflected in the following: the client’s control over technical details and project execution is significantly weakened during implementation; the requirements for upfront project clarity are extremely stringent, as any ambiguity in defining needs may lead to later changes and disputes; while the fixed-price mechanism locks in costs, it may incentivize contractors to adopt low-cost technologies or materials in pursuit of profit, potentially sacrificing long-term quality and performance. Moreover, this model lacks consideration for the project’s full lifecycle costs, as the contractor is only responsible for delivering the project within the contract period and does not focus on the economic efficiency or convenience of post-construction facility operation and maintenance. This may result in increased long-term operational burdens for the client. Therefore, the effective implementation of this model heavily relies on rigorous contract terms, the client’s strong regulatory capabilities, and the contractor’s commitment to contractual integrity.

　　(三)BOT模式：以经营权换取投资建设

　　BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer)，即建设-经营-转让，是一种融资性特许经营模式。它通过授予私营部门一定期限的特许经营权，吸引其投资并承担项目的建设、运营和维护。特许期内，私营方通过运营收益(如用户付费)回收投资并获取利润;特许期满后，项目资产无偿移交给政府或公共部门。

　　1.3BOT Model: Exchanging Operational Rights for Investment and Construction

　　BOT (Build-Operate-Transfer), which stands for build-operate-transfer, is a financing-oriented concession model. It attracts private sector investment by granting them a fixed-term concession, under which they undertake the construction, operation, and maintenance of the project. During the concession period, the private entity recovers its investment and earns profits through operational revenues (such as user fees). Upon the expiration of the concession, the project assets are transferred free of charge to the government or public sector.

　　该模式的核心在于“以经营权换取投资”。私营部门通过特许经营权获得项目的融资、建设与长期运营权，依靠运营期内的用户付费(如过路费、电费)回收投资并实现盈利;特许期满后，项目资产无偿移交给政府。这一模式实现了公共需求与私营资本效率的结合，政府无需当期财政投入即可推动基础设施建设，同时将项目建设和运营的主要商业风险转移给了私营合作方。

　　The core of this model lies in "exchanging operational rights for investment." The private sector acquires the rights to finance, construct, and operate the project over the long term through the concession, relying on user fees (such as tolls or electricity charges) during the operational phase to recoup investment and generate profits. At the end of the concession period, the project assets are transferred to the government free of charge. This model achieves a balance between public needs and private capital efficiency, enabling the government to advance infrastructure development without immediate fiscal expenditure while transferring the primary commercial risks of project construction and operation to the private partner.

　　该模式同样存在一定的局限性。漫长的特许期(常达20-30年)使项目面临市场需求波动与政策变化双重风险，易导致财务困境。复杂的融资结构与漫长的谈判推高前期成本。私营方为快速回收投资，可能采取损害公共利益的定价或降低维护标准，需政府强力监管。

　　However, this model also has certain limitations. The lengthy concession period (often 20–30 years) exposes the project to dual risks of market demand volatility and policy changes, which can easily lead to financial difficulties. The complex financing structure and prolonged negotiations drive up upfront costs. To expedite investment recovery, the private entity may adopt pricing strategies that harm public interests or reduce maintenance standards, necessitating strong government oversight.

　　(四)PFI模式：公共服务的私营化提供

　　PFI(Private Finance Initiative)，私人融资倡议，起源于英国，是PPP模式的一个重要子集和早期实践形式。其核心在于公共部门并非直接购买“资产”，而是购买由私营部门设计、融资、建造并长期运营维护的“服务”。公共部门根据服务的可用性和绩效水平，向私营方支付服务费。

　　1.4PFI Model: Private Provision of Public Services

　　PFI (Private Finance Initiative), which originated in the United Kingdom, is an important subset and early practical form of the PPP model. Its core principle is that the public sector does not directly purchase "assets" but rather purchases "services" designed, financed, constructed, and maintained over the long term by the private sector. The public sector pays service fees to the private party based on the availability and performance level of the services.

　　PFI模式的本质是政府向私营部门长期购买公共服务，而非直接投资建设基础设施。私营方承担项目的融资、设计、建设及长达25-30年的运营维护全流程责任，其回报完全取决于其提供服务的可用性与质量。这一机制将项目全生命周期风险大幅转移至私营部门，旨在构建一种公共部门与私营部门的协同机制，通过引入后者的资金、技术与管理经验，着力解决传统政府主导模式下基础设施项目普遍面临的初始投资压力巨大、长期运营效率不足以及全生命周期资源利用效率不高等问题。

　　The essence of the PFI model is that the government procures public services from the private sector over the long term rather than directly investing in infrastructure construction. The private party assumes full-process responsibility for financing, designing, constructing, and operating and maintaining the project over a period of 25–30 years, with its returns entirely dependent on the availability and quality of the services provided. This mechanism significantly transfers the project's lifecycle risks to the private sector. Its purpose is to establish a collaborative framework between the public and private sectors by leveraging the latter's capital, technology, and management expertise. This approach aims to address the common issues faced in traditionally government-led infrastructure projects, such as immense initial investment pressure, insufficient long-term operational efficiency, and suboptimal resource utilization throughout the project’s lifecycle.

　　然而，该模式虽旨在高效提供公共服务，但其复杂的融资与合同结构在实践中引发了诸多争议：一是项目前期成本高昂、谈判周期漫长;二是长期刚性的支付协议(通常基于可用性而非实际需求)导致公共部门财务负担沉重，且难以适应公共服务需求的动态变化;三是项目财务安排往往不透明，私营投资人可能通过复杂的资本结构获取超额利润，引发“牟取暴利”的公众质疑;四是在风险分担上，尽管合同意图将风险转移给私营方，但诸如需求风险、部分政策变化风险最终可能仍由公共部门隐性承担。

　　However, although this model aims to provide public services efficiently, its complex financing and contractual structures have sparked significant controversies in practice. First, the high upfront costs and lengthy negotiation cycles increase project initiation barriers. Second, the long-term, rigid payment agreements—often based on availability rather than actual demand—impose substantial financial burdens on public authorities and hinder their ability to adapt to evolving public service needs. Third, the lack of transparency in project financial arrangements may enable private investors to extract excessive profits through intricate capital structures, leading to public skepticism over "profit-seeking at public expense." Fourth, despite contractual intentions to transfer risks to the private sector, certain risks such as demand fluctuations and some policy changes ultimately remain implicitly borne by the public sector.

　　(五)DBO模式：运营责任的前置整合

　　DBO(Design-Build-Operate)，即设计-施工-运营，是一种将项目的设计、建造和长期运营责任捆绑授予单一实体的模式。与BOT不同，DBO模式通常不包含融资责任(即“F”)，项目资金仍主要由公共部门提供。承包商负责交付一个符合性能要求的设施，并确保其在长期运营期内稳定高效运行。

　　1.5DBO Model: Forward Integration of Operational Responsibility

　　DBO (Design-Build-Operate), which stands for design-build-operate, is a model that bundles the design, construction, and long-term operation responsibilities of a project and awards them to a single entity. Unlike BOT, the DBO model typically does not include financing responsibilities (i.e., the "F"), and project funding is still primarily provided by the public sector. The contractor is responsible for delivering a facility that meets performance requirements and ensuring its stable and efficient operation over the long term.

　　该模式将项目的设计、施工与长期运营维护整合于单一合同框架下，通过赋予承包商长期运营责任，促使其在设计阶段即充分考虑全生命周期成本与运营效率，从而规避传统模式下建设与运营脱节带来的性能缺陷与维护成本高企问题。

　　This model integrates the design, construction, and long-term operation and maintenance of the project within a single contractual framework. By assigning long-term operational responsibility to the contractor, it incentivizes the consideration of lifecycle costs and operational efficiency already during the design phase, thereby avoiding performance flaws and high maintenance costs resulting from the disconnection between construction and operation in traditional models.

　　该模式的局限在于运营绩效难以精确评估，承包商易为短期成本牺牲长期质量，复杂合同增加管理难度，且因不包含融资环节而降低私营部门参与意愿。

　　The limitations of this model lie in the difficulty of precisely evaluating operational performance, the contractor's tendency to sacrifice long-term quality for short-term cost savings, the increased management complexity due to intricate contracts, and the reduced willingness of the private sector to participate due to the absence of a financing component.

　　(六)其他重要管理模式

　　除上述五大综合性模式外，在国际工程实践中，尤其是在具体项目的交付执行与专业管理层面，还存在一系列基于不同合同范本和职责划分的重要模式。这些模式常与FIDIC(国际咨询工程师联合会)等国际通用合同条件紧密结合，并不断衍生出创新的商业组合，为项目决策者提供了更为精细化、模块化的工具。

　　1.6Other Significant Management Models

　　In addition to the five comprehensive models mentioned above, international engineering practice features a range of important models based on different contract templates and responsibility allocations, particularly at the level of project delivery execution and professional management. These models are often closely integrated with internationally recognized contract conditions such as those of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) and continually give rise to innovative commercial combinations. This provides project decision-makers with more refined and modular tools.

　　DBB(Design-Bid-Build，设计-招标-建造)是最经典、应用最广泛的项目管理模式。其流程严格遵循线性顺序：业主首先委托设计单位完成全部施工图设计，然后基于完整的设计文件进行施工招标，选定承包商后按图施工。该模式下，业主拥有对设计和施工的高度控制权，合同关系简单清晰。然而，其设计与施工完全分离的弊端显著：项目总体周期长，且设计方缺乏对施工可行性和成本的充分考虑，极易在施工阶段产生大量变更与索赔，导致项目总投资失控。DBB模式通常采用FIDIC 《施工合同条件》(红皮书) 作为标准范本，适用于技术标准成熟、业主希望深度掌控设计细节的项目。

　　DBB (Design-Bid-Build) is the most classic and widely used project management model. Its process strictly follows a linear sequence: the client first commissions a design firm to complete all construction drawings, then conducts construction bidding based on the finalized design documents, and finally selects a contractor to execute the work according to the drawings. In this model, the client retains a high degree of control over both design and construction, and the contractual relationships are straightforward. However, its significant drawback lies in the complete separation of design and construction: the overall project duration is prolonged, and designers often lack sufficient consideration of construction feasibility and costs. This frequently leads to numerous change orders and claims during the construction phase, potentially causing the total project investment to exceed budget. The DBB model typically adopts the FIDIC Conditions of Contract for Construction (Red Book) as its standard template and is suitable for projects with mature technical standards where the client desires in-depth control over design details.

　　EPCC模式指在标准EPC模式基础上，将承包商的工作范围进一步延伸至“试运行”(Commissioning)。在该模式下，承包商不仅负责工程的设计、采购和施工，还需承担将设施或装置调试至稳定运行状态、达到合同规定的性能和可靠性指标的全部责任。这标志着承包商责任从 “建成” 实质性地升级为 “建成并能用” ，确保项目从建设阶段到商业运营的无缝衔接。EPCC模式对承包商的综合技术能力、系统集成和调试经验提出了极高要求，因此成为化工、油气、炼化、电力等流程工业领域国际项目的标配交付模式。

　　EPCC Mode extends the contractor's scope of work to include "Commissioning" beyond the standard EPC model. Under this framework, the contractor is not only responsible for the engineering, procurement, and construction but also assumes full responsibility for commissioning the facility or plant to achieve stable operation and meet the contractually specified performance and reliability criteria. This marks a substantial shift in the contractor’s responsibility from "completing construction" to "delivering a fully functional facility," ensuring a seamless transition from the construction phase to commercial operation. The EPCC model places extremely high demands on the contractor’s comprehensive technical capabilities, system integration skills, and commissioning experience, making it the standard delivery model for international projects in process industries such as chemicals, oil and gas, refining, and power.

　　EPC+F模式是 “工程总承包+融资” 的商业模式创新，并非一种独立的合同范式。它指具备雄厚资本实力或金融资源的工程总承包商，利用自身信用、与金融机构的战略合作或产融结合平台，为业主提供一揽子融资解决方案，例如协助项目获得银行贷款、提供出口信贷、发起项目融资，甚至进行少量直接投资。承包商通过绑定融资安排与工程承包服务，显著增强其投标竞争力，帮助业主特别是资金不足或融资渠道有限的发展中国家业主启动项目。该模式已成为中国、韩国等国际工程承包企业“走出去”、获取大型项目订单的关键商业策略之一，尤其在基础设施、能源和工业领域应用广泛。

　　EPC+F Model is an innovative business model combining "Engineering, Procurement, and Construction with Financing," rather than a standalone contractual framework. It refers to engineering, procurement, and construction contractors with substantial capital strength or financial resources leveraging their own credit, strategic partnerships with financial institutions, or integrated industry-finance platforms to provide clients with a comprehensive financing solution. This may include assisting the project in obtaining bank loans, offering export credit, initiating project financing, or even making minor direct investments. By bundling financing arrangements with engineering and construction services, contractors significantly enhance their competitive edge in bidding. This approach helps clients, particularly those in developing countries with limited funding or financing channels, to initiate projects. This model has become one of the key business strategies for international engineering contractors from countries like China and South Korea to "go global" and secure large-scale project contracts, especially in infrastructure, energy, and industrial sectors.

　　PMC(Project Management Contracting，项目管理承包)模式下，业主聘请具备超凡管理能力的专业机构(项目管理承包商)，作为其决策智囊和管理臂膀，对项目的规划、设计、采购、施工、试运行等进行全过程的统筹、协调与控制。PMC承包商的核心价值在于其专业化的管理体系与集成能力，它不直接承担施工风险，其主要目标是利用专业知识，保障项目在预算内按时、优质完成，并实现全生命周期价值优化。该模式特别适用于技术复杂、界面繁多、投资巨大的超大型项目。

　　Under the PMC (Project Management Contracting) model, the client engages a highly capable professional organization (the project management contractor) to serve as its strategic advisor and management extension. The PMC is responsible for the overall planning, coordination, and control of the project throughout its lifecycle, including planning, design, procurement, construction, and commissioning. The core value of a PMC contractor lies in its professional management systems and integration capabilities. It does not directly assume construction risks; its primary objective is to utilize its expertise to ensure the project is completed on time, within budget, and to high-quality standards, while optimizing its lifecycle value. This model is particularly suitable for exceptionally large-scale projects characterized by technical complexity, numerous interfaces, and significant investment.

　　BOO(Build-Own-Operate，建设-拥有-运营)是BOT模式的衍生与变体。其根本区别在于，私营部门在项目建成后永久拥有项目资产的所有权，不存在特许经营期满后的资产移交环节。政府的监管职责和公共服务目标，通过长期的产品或服务购买协议、严格的行业监管以及项目初始授予时的竞争性招标来实现。BOO模式适用于那些资产移交意义不大、或长期私有化运营更能激发效率与创新的领域，如某些可再生能源电站、通信基础设施、工业废水处理设施等。

　　BOO (Build-Own-Operate) is a derivative and variant of the BOT model. Its fundamental distinction is that the private sector retains permanent ownership of the project assets after completion, with no transfer of assets at the end of a concession period. The government fulfills its regulatory duties and public service objectives through long-term product or service purchase agreements, stringent industry regulation, and competitive bidding during the initial project award. The BOO model is applicable to sectors where asset transfer holds little significance or where long-term private operation can better stimulate efficiency and innovation, such as certain renewable energy power plants, telecommunications infrastructure, and industrial wastewater treatment facilities.

　　综上所述，国际工程的管理生态是分层且融合的。一个大型基础设施项目(如采用BOT模式)在顶层架构之下，其建设阶段可能采用EPC或EPCC合同进行交付，同时业主方可能聘请PMC进行全局管理;其融资方案中可能嵌入“EPC+F” 的元素。因此，明智的决策者不仅需要理解每种模式的内涵，更需掌握其组合与适配的艺术，如同搭积木般，为特定项目构建出最富效率与韧性的管理模式复合体。下文将在此基础上，对各模式进行系统性对比与选择分析。

　　In summary, the management ecosystem of international engineering is layered and integrated. Beneath the top-level structure of a large infrastructure project (e.g., one using a BOT model), its construction phase may employ an EPC or EPCC contract for delivery, while the client may engage a PMC for overall management. The financing solution may incorporate elements of "EPC+F." Therefore, astute decision-makers must not only understand the essence of each model but also master the art of combining and adapting them. Like building with blocks, they must construct the most efficient and resilient composite management model for each specific project. The following section will build upon this foundation to provide a systematic comparison and selection analysis of these models.

　　二、主要模式的综合对比与选择分析

　　通过对五大主流管理模式的系统对比，可以清晰观察到国际工程项目管理模式从单一交付向全周期整合演进的逻辑脉络。当前的选择逻辑已超越单纯的技术经济比较，而需要综合考虑项目的公共属性、收益机制、风险承受能力及可持续发展要求，在控制权配置、风险分配和长期利益平衡之间寻求最优解。

　　2. Comprehensive Comparison and Selection Analysis of Major Models

　　Through a systematic comparison of the five mainstream management models, a clear evolutionary logic can be observed in international engineering project management—transitioning from single-phase delivery to full-cycle integration. The current selection logic has moved beyond purely technical and economic comparisons and now requires comprehensive consideration of the project’s public attributes, revenue mechanisms, risk tolerance, and sustainability requirements. The aim is to find an optimal balance among the allocation of control rights, risk distribution, and long-term benefit equilibrium.

　　三、总结与展望

　　国际工程项目管理模式的演进，清晰地展现了一条从简单交易到复杂合作、从资产交付到价值创造的逻辑主线。EPC模式代表了单纯的“建造交付”，DBO模式向前延伸至“运营整合”，BOT与PFI模式则进一步深化为“投资运营服务”，而广义的PPP模式更是升维至“长期战略伙伴关系”。这一演进的核心驱动力，是对基础设施全生命周期综合价值最大化的持续追求，其本质是风险分配越来越精细化、各方利益越来越趋向协同。

　　3. Summary and Outlook

　　The evolution of international engineering project management models clearly reveals a logical progression from simple transactions to complex collaborations, and from asset delivery to value creation. The EPC model represents pure "construction delivery," the DBO model extends this forward to "operational integration," while the BOT and PFI models further deepen this into "investment-operation services." The broader PPP model elevates this to a "long-term strategic partnership." The core driving force behind this evolution is the continuous pursuit of maximizing the comprehensive value of infrastructure throughout its lifecycle, with its essence lying in increasingly refined risk allocation and growing alignment of interests among all parties.

　　项目管理从局部整合向投、建、营、拆全生命周期一体化深度演进;成功标准从交付资产转向确保长期绩效输出，合同支付与可持续性、可用性等指标绑定;绿色低碳与气候韧性成为项目强制性约束，直接影响融资与模式;BIM、数字孪生等数字化技术的普及，正实现全过程智能管理，为复杂合作提供技术基石。

　　Project management is evolving from partial integration to deep, lifecycle-wide integration encompassing investment, construction, operation, and decommissioning. Success criteria are shifting from asset delivery to ensuring long-term performance output, with contract payments tied to indicators such as sustainability and availability. Green, low-carbon principles and climate resilience have become mandatory constraints for projects, directly influencing financing and model selection. The widespread adoption of digital technologies such as BIM and digital twins is enabling intelligent whole-process management, providing a technological foundation for complex collaborations.

　　面对多样化的模式选择，必须摒弃寻求“最佳实践”的思维定式，转而坚持 “情境适配” 原则。决策者应基于对项目自身特质(技术复杂性、收益机制)、政府核心目标(融资、效率、控制权)、市场环境(资本供给、法律政策)及风险偏好的全面而冷静的评估，来选择或创新最合适的模式。

　　Faced with diverse model choices, it is essential to abandon the mindset of seeking "best practices" and instead adhere to the principle of "contextual adaptation." Decision-makers should select or innovate the most suitable model based on a comprehensive and objective assessment of the project's inherent characteristics (technical complexity, revenue mechanisms), the government's core objectives (financing, efficiency, control), the market environment (capital supply, legal policies), and risk preferences.

　　参考文献：

　　一、中国国内法、司法解释等文件：

　　[1]《基础设施和公用事业特许经营管理办法》

　　[2]《中华人民共和国行政许可法》

　　[3]《中华人民共和国招标投标法》

　　[4]《中华人民共和国政府采购法》

　　二、学术著作：

　　[5]江国华：《PPP模式中的公共利益保护》，载《政法论丛》2018年第6期。

　　[6]应松年主编：《行政法与行政诉讼法学》，中国人民大学出版社2009年版。

　　[7]王锡锌、郑雅方：《日本公私合作模式研究——以PFI立法过程为中心的考察》，载《行政法论丛》2017年第1期。

　　[8]莫莉：《英国PPP/CPFI项目融资法律的演进及其对中国的借鉴意义》，载《国际商务研究》2016年第5期。