FIDIC Contracts, Risk Allocation, and Sustainability in International Construction: Comparative Lessons from Mega Projects
Abstract
This study examines how FIDIC contracts operate in practice within international construction projects, with particular attention to risk allocation, dispute resolution, and sustainability-related obligations. Although FIDIC forms are designed to provide standardized contractual frameworks, their practical effectiveness may vary depending on the legal, institutional, and project-specific environments in which they are applied. The study adopts a qualitative comparative case study approach based on three selected mega-project contexts: NEOM in Saudi Arabia, Crossrail in the United Kingdom, and the Noor Solar Project in Morocco. These cases were selected to reflect different legal and regulatory environments and to enable comparison across hybrid and common law contexts. The analysis draws on contractual and legal literature, selected judicial authorities, and project-related materials to examine how legal systems, contractual amendments, governance structures, and sustainability requirements influence the practical operation of FIDIC-based contracts.The findings suggest that the effectiveness of FIDIC contracts is shaped less by their formal wording alone than by the context in which they are interpreted and implemented. In particular, legal environment appears to affect the practical operation of dispute-resolution mechanisms, national amendments may significantly alter the standardized operation of FIDIC forms, and sustainability obligations may introduce additional layers of contractual and governance complexity when incorporated into major projects.The study contributes to construction law and project governance literature by offering an integrated legal-comparative discussion of how FIDIC contracts function across selected mega-project environments. It suggests that FIDIC contracts are best understood as structured but context-sensitive frameworks whose practical effectiveness depends on legal setting, institutional support, and project-specific governance conditions.