The market industry is rapidly changing and modifications are taking place. Over the years, it has been noticed that project success is a challenging issue, which requires several endeavours from project parties. The procurement system is characterized as a tool, the implementation of which delivers project results. The procurement system is classified into four distinct categories; traditional, design & build, strategic & integrated, partnering. Based on those, the most popular procurement technique historically is the traditional method. The traditional method is mostly applied successfully in small projects, when less complexity and uncertainty emerge. However, the complexity and uncertainty have largely increased, marking the traditional method slightly impractical for successful results. In that case, a new procurement method is introduced, the Best Value Procurement (known as BVP) method. A critical advantage of the BVP is the embodiment of complexity and collaboration demands into its process. Despite its advantages and ambitions, the BVP does not always secure a successful result. Therefore, the main question that will be addressed in this research is: “How could public organizations implement Best Value Procurement (BVP) to benefit the project delivery?” To answer the main research question, a deep investigation through the BVP concept (elements, activities etc.) was executed. Firstly, an extensive literature review was exercised in order to cover the BVP method on the theoretical side. Based on the literature results, a theoretical BVP framework was established. Secondly, the findings acquired from the literature review were examined, leading to the exploratory interviews. Interviews are exploring the practical side of the BVP and how is applied in practice. Seven interviewees were selected. An understanding of differences and similarities between theory and practice was essential. Using the findings from the frameworks’ comparison, a list of adjustments (or recommendations) for improving the BVP method is established. Interviews with experts were held. Three experts, coming from public organisations and consultancy firms apply their knowledge and expertise in order to improve the BVP method. Thereafter, an alternative BVP framework was established. The alternative BVP framework incorporates components (elements, activities, including parties, final deliverables), the influence of which is characterized as critical for the BVP success. Public organisations frequently apply the BVP method in their projects. Being BVP initiators in the market industry, public organisations should implement BVP carefully. The alternative BVP framework, proposed in the research, could be used by public clients in order to achieve successful project outcomes. For a successful implementation of the BVP method, special attention should be attributed to the main alterations: General highlights: 1. An introduction of Stage zero; training sessions, about BVP philosophy, are becoming available through every single project participant 2. An introduction of final deliverables (per step); setting clearly the deliverables to be received at the end of every stage Selection stage: 1. Interviews inclusion as part of the evaluation process, not separate activity of the selection stage 2. Consultants and tender managers are getting an important role throughout the selection stage 3. Once the selection stage finishes, the evaluation committee or client has to select only one contractor. Multiple contractors should not be accepted...

The Netherlands is world famous when it comes to coastal defence. The world is always changing, therefore the Netherlands, together with many countries, has to adapt constantly to the climate. This constant change means that in particular the coastline of the Netherlands requires extra attention because of the uncertainty of sea level rise. The Dutch coastline is protected by means of a static approach. However the intention for the future is to apply an adaptable design to better handle sea level rise. This report focuses on a method that uses a dynamic approach with the aim of keeping the Netherlands protected against rising sea levels that are uncertain. This dynamic approach consist of several pathways that each consist of different actions. With the help of evaluation-criteria, the pathways in the dynamic approach are evaluated. The outcome of this evaluation is described and recommendations for future research are given. The report focuses on keeping the coastline of the south-west of the Netherlands protected against the uncertainty of the rising sea. This will be done with the help of a dynamic approach. First, an area analysis was carried out to find out what aspects should be given the most attention. After that, the method of DAPP is used to function as a dynamic approach. This Dynamic Adaptive Pathway Policy is then used to implement the different pathways in a structured way. These pathways are made up of different actions. These actions are existing plans presented by Deltares and they form a big list. Not all plans do function properly in order to function as a flood protection and so a selection method is used to extract the right plans out of this list. The requirements that are used to select the right plans have its main focus on protecting the hinterland against sea level rise, storm surge and wave load. The extracted plans that function as an action are implemented in the different pathways of the DAPP. To evaluate these pathways, evaluation-criteria are used in a Multi Criteria Analysis. These criteria are extracted from sources like a stakeholder analysis, old and new watermasters and a brainstorm session with the group members who act through their own accumulated expertise. The extracted criteria in combination with determined weighting factors are placed in a Multi Criteria Analysis after which the pathways have been assessed individually. This evaluation process led to some pathways being iterated to a different shape for the final design of the DAPP. From the project can be concluded that the DAPP approach works well to combine different static plans into a comprehensive mitigation strategy. Secondly the evaluation criteria can be successfully derived from the old and new watermasters. The old watermasters already have one or more of their plans implemented. The new watermasters, are working on flood protection plans for the future in their daily life and have a lot of experience in the current engineering field. From the stakeholder analyses, the criteria can also be derived but than from the perspective of a variety of stakeholders. Thirdly, organizing criteria using a PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental) and objectives tree has significant benefits for determining weighting factors. At last, it can be concluded that the main requirements used in this project are a good starting point, but they are only focused on reducing the flood risk (only technology). To select plans on a wider perspective(also Political, Economic, Social, Legal and Environmental), it is recommended to take a closer look to requirements from that perspectives. Advised is to consult experts in those fields to help with that.