IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v46y2012i4p707-719.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-benefit analysis according to Sen: An application in the evaluation of transport infrastructures in France

Author

Listed:
  • Hyard, Alexandra

Abstract

Made compulsory in France for major transport infrastructures, cost-benefit analysis is constantly being improved to achieve the best socio-economic evaluation possible. According to the philosopher and economist Amartya Sen, this analysis should meet two requirements: one ethical, the other democratic. We will examine the evaluation procedure in France and highlight the gap between its officially more democratic character and its still insufficiently ethical character, from the viewpoint of this dual requirement.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyard, Alexandra, 2012. "Cost-benefit analysis according to Sen: An application in the evaluation of transport infrastructures in France," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 707-719.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:46:y:2012:i:4:p:707-719
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2012.01.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856412000031
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2012.01.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eliasson, Jonas, 2009. "A cost-benefit analysis of the Stockholm congestion charging system," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 468-480, May.
    2. Harberger, Arnold C, 1978. "On the Use of Distributional Weights in Social Cost-Benefit Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(2), pages 87-120, April.
    3. John V. Krutilla, 1961. "Welfare Aspects of Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69, pages 226-226.
    4. Quinet, E., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 27-34, January.
    5. El-Hifnawi, M. B., 2002. "Cross-town bus routes as a solution for decentralized travel: a cost-benefit analysis for Monterrey, Mexico," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 127-144, February.
    6. Amartya Sen, 1997. "Maximization and the Act of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 745-780, July.
    7. Sen, Amartya, 2000. "The Discipline of Cost-Benefit Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 931-952, June.
    8. Gao, Song & Frejinger, Emma & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2011. "Cognitive cost in route choice with real-time information: An exploratory analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 916-926, November.
    9. Robin Boadway, 1974. "A Note on the Welfare Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis," Working Paper 149, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    10. Mishan, Ezra J, 1976. "The Use of Compensating and Equivalent Variations in Cost-Benefit Analysis," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 43(17), pages 185-197, May.
    11. Boadway, Robin W, 1974. "The Welfare Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 84(336), pages 926-939, December.
    12. E. J. Mishan, 1952. "The Principles of Compensation Reconsidered," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60, pages 312-312.
    13. Greene, David L. & Duleep, K. G., 1993. "Costs and benefits of automative fuel economy improvement: A partial analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 217-235, May.
    14. Harberger, Arnold C, 1971. "Three Basic Postulates for Applied Welfare Economics: An Interpretive Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 785-797, September.
    15. Tudela, Alejandro & Akiki, Natalia & Cisternas, Rene, 2006. "Comparing the output of cost benefit and multi-criteria analysis: An application to urban transport investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 414-423, June.
    16. Rotaris, Lucia & Danielis, Romeo & Marcucci, Edoardo & Massiani, Jérôme, 2010. "The urban road pricing scheme to curb pollution in Milan, Italy: Description, impacts and preliminary cost-benefit analysis assessment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 359-375, June.
    17. Joseph Persky, 2001. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Classical Creed," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 199-208, Fall.
    18. Mishan, E J, 1974. "Flexibility and Consistency in Project Evaluation," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 41(161), pages 81-96, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hananel, Ravit & Berechman, Joseph, 2016. "Justice and transportation decision-making: The capabilities approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 78-85.
    2. Majid Baseer & Christian Ghiaus & Roxane Viala & Ninon Gauthier & Souleymane Daniel, 2023. "pELECTRE-Tri: Probabilistic ELECTRE-Tri Method—Application for the Energy Renovation of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-25, July.
    3. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & Wee, Bert van, 2013. "Attitudes towards the role of Cost–Benefit Analysis in the decision-making process for spatial-infrastructure projects: A Dutch case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-14.
    4. Carlos Oliveira Cruz & Joaquim Miranda Sarmento, 2020. "Traffic forecast inaccuracy in transportation: a literature review of roads and railways projects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1571-1606, August.
    5. Peyman Babashamsi & Nur Izzi Md Yusoff & Halil Ceylan & Nor Ghani Md Nor & Hashem Salarzadeh Jenatabadi, 2016. "Sustainable Development Factors in Pavement Life-Cycle: Highway/Airport Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2013. "Ranking the substantive problems in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis practice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 241-255.
    7. Geoffrey A. Battista & Kevin Manaugh, 2019. "My way or the highway? Framing transportation planners’ attitudes in negotiating professional expertise and public insight," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1271-1290, August.
    8. Karen Lucas & Bert Wee & Kees Maat, 2016. "A method to evaluate equitable accessibility: combining ethical theories and accessibility-based approaches," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 473-490, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2013. "Ranking the substantive problems in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis practice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 241-255.
    2. Nurmi, Väinö & Ahtiainen, Heini, 2018. "Distributional Weights in Environmental Valuation and Cost-benefit Analysis: Theory and Practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 217-228.
    3. Robin Boadway, 2017. "Second-Best Theory: Ageing well at Sixty," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 249-270, May.
    4. Udo Ebert, 1986. "Equity and distribution in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 67-78, December.
    5. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & Wee, Bert van, 2013. "Attitudes towards the role of Cost–Benefit Analysis in the decision-making process for spatial-infrastructure projects: A Dutch case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-14.
    6. Heckman, James, 2001. "Accounting for Heterogeneity, Diversity and General Equilibrium in Evaluating Social Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(475), pages 654-699, November.
    7. Martin, Will, 2021. "Tools for measuring the full impacts of agricultural interventions," IFPRI-MCC technical papers 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. John Piggott, 1982. "The Social Marginal Valuation of Income: Australian Estimates from Government Behaviour," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 58(1), pages 92-99, March.
    9. Udo Ebert, 2007. "Redistributional Preference in Environmental Policy," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 63(4), pages 548-562, December.
    10. Smart, Michael, 1999. "A simple proof of the efficiency of the poll tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 459-465, March.
    11. Stoeckl, Natalie & Hicks, Christina & Farr, Marina & Grainger, Daniel & Esparon, Michelle & Thomas, Joseph & Larson, Silva, 2018. "The Crowding Out of Complex Social Goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-72.
    12. Souche-Le Corvec, Stéphanie & Mercier, Aurélie & Ovtracht, Nicolas & Chevallier, Amandine, 2019. "Urban toll and electric vehicles: The winning ticket for Lyon Metropolitan Area (France)," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 17-33.
    13. Jorge Iván González, 2016. "Sentimientos y racionalidad en economía," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Economía, edition 1, number 75, August.
    14. Martin, Will & Ivanic, Maros & Mamun, Abdullah, 2021. "Modeling Development Policies with Multiple Objectives," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315330, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Scott Farrow, 2011. "Incorporating Equity in Regulatory and Benefit‐Cost Analysis Using Risk‐Based Preferences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(6), pages 902-907, June.
    16. Yew-Kwang Ng, 2010. "Consumer Surplus," Chapters, in: Mark Blaug & Peter Lloyd (ed.), Famous Figures and Diagrams in Economics, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Coate, Stephen, 2000. "An Efficiency Approach to the Evaluation of Policy Changes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 437-455, April.
    18. Marquez, Pablo, 2006. "Cost Benefit Analysis, Value Of A Statistical Life And Culture: Challenges For Risk Regulation," MPRA Paper 2632, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Feb 2007.
    19. Randall, Alan, 1982. "Economic Surplus Concepts and Their Use in Benefit Cost Analysis," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(02), pages 1-29, August.
    20. Zhong, Shaopeng & Bushell, Max, 2017. "Impact of the built environment on the vehicle emission effects of road pricing policies: A simulation case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 235-249.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:46:y:2012:i:4:p:707-719. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.