This paper provides an overview of risk management, IPRA tool development and research findings and a brief explanation on how the tool is used. Also included are recommendations to practitioners who are pursuing international projects as well as areas for future research. Our research investigation has shown that the tools and techniques developed can assist in improving the overall success of international capital projects oject teams performing risk management activities are rewarded. Those that" go it blindly "do so at their own Risk management A myriad of risk and risk-related definitions are applied to construction projects, and no standard definitions or procedures exist for what constitutes a risk assessment. In the construction industry, risk is often referred to as the presence of potential or actual treats or opportunities that influence the objectives of a project during construction, commissioning, or at time of use(RAMP 1998). Risk is also defined as the exposure to the chance of occurrences of events adversely or favorably affecting project objectives as a consequence of uncertainty(Al-Bahar 1990). Dias and loannou(1995) concluded that there are two types of risk: 1)pure risk when there is the possibility of financial loss but no possibility of financial gain, and 2)speculative risk that involves the possibility of both gains and losses. CIls definitive work on construction risks(Cll 1988)uses lassic operations research literature to distinguish the concepts of risk, certainty, and uncertainty, and is consistent with the literature(ASCE 1979: CIRA 1994; Kangari 1995: Hastak and Shaked 2000; PMI 2000; Smith 2001)on what is considered as the sequential procedures for construction risk management: 1) identification, 2)assessment, 3)analysis of impact, and 4 )management response Increased concerns about project risk have given rise to various attempts to develop risk mana methodologies. An example of such is the Risk Analysis and Management of Projects (RAMP) produced by the Institute of Civil Engineers and the Institute of Actuaries in the United Kingdom(RAMP This method uses a project framework to identify and mitigate risk through the accepted framework of risk identification and project controls by focusing on risks as they occur during the project life cycle. It requires users to follow a rational series of procedures and to undertake this analysis at scheduled intervals during the life cycle of a project. RAMP applies to all types of project but does not focus on international issues Traditional risk assessment for construction has been synonymous with probabilistic analysis(Liftson 1982, Al-Bahar 1990). Such approaches require events to be mutually exclusive, exhaustive, and conditional ndependent. However, construction involves many variables, and it is often difficult to determine causality, dependence and correlations. As a result, subjective analytical methods that rely on historical information and the experiences of individuals and companies have been used to assess the impact of construction risk and uncertainty(Bajaj, Oluwoye, and Lenard 1997) Although contracts are the mechanism to allocate liabilities and responsibilities of project participants in construction, contract language alone is insufficient to specify and appoint all the risks(ACEC/AGC, 1992 Rahman and Kumaraswamy 2002). An ideal process would address the individual needs of each organization and each project( Chapman and Ward 1997) The distribution of risk between the client and contractor tends to overshadow effective management strategies and investigations show that contactors and owners give minimal consideration to risks outside the realm of their own concerns(Kim and Bajaj 2000, ENR 2002). Although the owners project team must identify ith the business mission of the company, there are often disconnects. Cll research has shown the failure to align business goals and specific project goals due to poor pre-project planning is a major industry challenge (CII1997) Determination of risk responsibilities and ownership is critical yet can be difficult to allocate for international projects. The Federation Internationale des Ingenieurs Conseils(the International Federation of Consulting Engineers, FIDIC)and the International European Construction Federation(FIEC) publish two well known and widely-accepted forms of conditions of contract for international construction projects(the Red and Yellow Books) that include provisions on the fair and equitable risk sharing between the owner and the contractor as well as risk responsibilities, liabilities, indemnity, and insurance. a discussion on risk sharing is included in an analysis of the FIDIC Red Book(Bunni 1997) that includes a series of flow diagrams of the risks in construction, and their ensuing responsibilities, liabilities and how these are dealt with by the red Book Conditions of Contract for work of Civil Engineering Construction)3 This paper provides an overview of risk management, IPRA tool development and research findings, and a brief explanation on how the tool is used. Also included are recommendations to practitioners who are pursuing international projects as well as areas for future research. Our research investigation has shown that the tools and techniques developed can assist in improving the overall success of international capital projects. Project teams performing risk management activities are rewarded. Those that “go it blindly” do so at their own folly. Risk Management A myriad of risk and risk-related definitions are applied to construction projects, and no standard definitions or procedures exist for what constitutes a risk assessment. In the construction industry, risk is often referred to as the presence of potential or actual treats or opportunities that influence the objectives of a project during construction, commissioning, or at time of use (RAMP 1998). Risk is also defined as the exposure to the chance of occurrences of events adversely or favorably affecting project objectives as a consequence of uncertainty (Al-Bahar 1990). Dias and Ioannou (1995) concluded that there are two types of risk: 1) pure risk when there is the possibility of financial loss but no possibility of financial gain, and 2) speculative risk that involves the possibility of both gains and losses. CII’s definitive work on construction risks (CII 1988) uses classic operations research literature to distinguish the concepts of risk, certainty, and uncertainty, and is consistent with the literature (ASCE 1979; CIRA 1994; Kangari 1995; Hastak and Shaked 2000; PMI 2000; Smith 2001) on what is considered as the sequential procedures for construction risk management: 1) identification, 2) assessment, 3) analysis of impact, and 4) management response. Increased concerns about project risk have given rise to various attempts to develop risk management methodologies. An example of such is the Risk Analysis and Management of Projects (RAMP) method produced by the Institute of Civil Engineers and the Institute of Actuaries in the United Kingdom (RAMP 1998). This method uses a project framework to identify and mitigate risk through the accepted framework of risk identification and project controls by focusing on risks as they occur during the project life cycle. It requires users to follow a rational series of procedures and to undertake this analysis at scheduled intervals during the life cycle of a project. RAMP applies to all types of project but does not focus on international issues. Traditional risk assessment for construction has been synonymous with probabilistic analysis (Liftson 1982, Al-Bahar 1990). Such approaches require events to be mutually exclusive, exhaustive, and conditionally independent. However, construction involves many variables, and it is often difficult to determine causality, dependence and correlations. As a result, subjective analytical methods that rely on historical information and the experiences of individuals and companies have been used to assess the impact of construction risk and uncertainty (Bajaj, Oluwoye, and Lenard 1997). Although contracts are the mechanism to allocate liabilities and responsibilities of project participants in construction, contract language alone is insufficient to specify and appoint all the risks (ACEC/AGC, 1992, Rahman and Kumaraswamy 2002). An ideal process would address the individual needs of each organization and each project (Chapman and Ward 1997). The distribution of risk between the client and contractor tends to overshadow effective management strategies and investigations show that contactors and owners give minimal consideration to risks outside the realm of their own concerns (Kim and Bajaj 2000, ENR 2002). Although the owners project team must identify with the business mission of the company, there are often disconnects. CII research has shown the failure to align business goals and specific project goals due to poor pre-project planning is a major industry challenge (CII 1997). Determination of risk responsibilities and ownership is critical yet can be difficult to allocate for international projects. The Fédération Internationale des Ingénieurs Conseils (the International Federation of Consulting Engineers, FIDIC) and the International European Construction Federation (FIEC) publish two well￾known and widely-accepted forms of conditions of contract for international construction projects (the Red and Yellow Books) that include provisions on the fair and equitable risk sharing between the owner and the contractor as well as risk responsibilities, liabilities, indemnity, and insurance. A discussion on risk sharing is included in an analysis of the FIDIC Red Book (Bunni 1997) that includes a series of flow diagrams of the risks in construction, and their ensuing responsibilities, liabilities and how these are dealt with by the Red Book (Conditions of Contract for work of Civil Engineering Construction)