This study focuses upon knowledge governance mechanisms of integrating specialised knowledge on underground utilities in large infrastructure projects. The integration of knowledge is essential for the realisation of such projects. The study explores the formal and informal knowledge governance mechanisms in three large infrastructure projects and compares these mechanisms to reveal their effects on knowledge integration. The findings show that combining reward systems, project culture and trust are targeting the motivation of underground experts to share their knowledge and allocation of authority and project network are mechanisms aimed at the coordination between managers and underground experts to integrate knowledge. We contribute to studies on knowledge governance by enabling further empirical insight in the relationships between formal and informal mechanisms.

Recently, scholars have called for a focus on subjective aspects of risk management as a suitable lens for understanding how it functions. In line with this lens, this study focuses on project actors’ viewpoints on risk management in the context of construction projects to provide novel insights in risk management. Drawing on Renn's model and following a Q methodology, we identify four risk management approaches among asset managers and project managers working at the Dutch Schiphol Airport. The action-oriented and future-oriented viewpoints are dominant, while the expert input and stakeholder-centric viewpoints are in the minority. Our findings extend the risk management debate by showing that (1) there are various approaches to risk management that have been identified independently from the formal risk management; (2) these approaches cannot be explained by a project actor's role or objective within the project; and (3) that project actors have a dominant focus on managing complexity-induced risks at the expense of managing other types of risks.

Governing material conditions—including physical, material subjects such as machines, build constructions, construction materials, and subsoils—is a crucial challenge within projects and is underrepresented in project governance theory. To clarify the relationship between project governance and materiality, we draw on translation theory, which is essentially about the reinterpretation, appropriation, and representation of interests related to materials. This paper studies the challenges of governing the underground during the construction of the new terminal at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. The findings show that, during the project life cycle, the translation of the underground by project actors hampered the necessary relocation of utilities in this project. This eventually resulted in delays and unforeseen costs. This translation is explained by a combination of the governance of the project, strategic interactions of project actors, and the characteristics and context of the material conditions. We contribute to project governance studies by demonstrating the usefulness of translation theory to better understand the mechanisms at play in governing underrepresented material conditions in infrastructure projects.