Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Ranking the substantive problems in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis practice

Contents:

Author Info

  • Mouter, Niek
  • Annema, Jan Anne
  • van Wee, Bert
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    This paper investigates the perceptions of key participants in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis (CBA) practice regarding substantive problems when appraising spatial-infrastructure projects with CBA. Two research methods were applied. Firstly, 86 key participants in the Dutch CBA practice were interviewed in-depth in order to obtain an overview and a ranking of perceived substantive problems with CBA in the Netherlands. Secondly, the people interviewed were also asked to fill in a written questionnaire in which they were asked to rank the substantive problems once again, in order to improve the validity of the ranking; 74 of the participants completed this questionnaire. The most important conclusions of this paper are, firstly, that key participants in the Dutch CBA practice consider ‘problems with the estimation of the non-monetized project effects’ as the most important substantive problem cluster and ‘problems with monetizing project effects’ as the second most important substantive problem cluster. Secondly, key participants in the Dutch CBA practice consider the ‘problem analysis’ in a CBA to be a very important substantive problem. Thirdly, there is, in a broad sense, consensus among the different groups in the Dutch CBA practice concerning their perception of the seriousness of problem clusters and the way they rank the problem clusters. Fourthly, a large part of the substantive problems mentioned by the key participants in the Dutch CBA practice are non-specific CBA problems.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585641300027X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

    Volume (Year): 49 (2013)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 241-255

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:49:y:2013:i:c:p:241-255

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description

    Order Information:
    Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
    Web: https://shop.elsevier.com/order?id=547&ref=547_01_ooc_1&version=01

    Related research

    Keywords: Cost–benefit analysis; Substantive problems; Perceptions of key participants; Content analysis; Transport project appraisal;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Verhoef, Erik, 1994. "External effects and social costs of road transport," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 273-287, July.
    2. Vickerman, R., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies for transport projects in the United Kingdom," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 7-16, January.
    3. Bent Flyvbjerg & Mette K. Skamris holm & S�ren L. Buhl, 2003. "How common and how large are cost overruns in transport infrastructure projects?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 71-88, January.
    4. Forkenbrock, David J., 2001. "Comparison of external costs of rail and truck freight transportation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 321-337, May.
    5. Wardman, Mark, 2004. "Public transport values of time," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 363-377, October.
    6. Rothengatter, W., 2000. "Evaluation of infrastructure investments in Germany," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 17-25, January.
    7. Damart, Sébastien & Roy, Bernard, 2009. "The uses of cost-benefit analysis in public transportation decision-making in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 200-212, August.
    8. William D. Nordhaus, 2007. "A Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 686-702, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Sayers, T. M. & Jessop, A. T. & Hills, P. J., 2003. "Multi-criteria evaluation of transport options--flexible, transparent and user-friendly?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 95-105, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Fosgerau, Mogens, 2007. "Using nonparametrics to specify a model to measure the value of travel time," MPRA Paper 12009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Bråthen, Svein & Hervik, Arild, 1997. "Strait crossings and economic development : Developing economic impact assessment by means of ex post analyses," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 193-200, October.
    14. Sen, Amartya Kumar, 2000. "The Discipline of Costâ€Benefit Analysis," Scholarly Articles 3444801, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    15. Holz-Rau, Christian & Scheiner, Joachim, 2011. "Safety and travel time in cost-benefit analysis: A sensitivity analysis for North Rhine-Westphalia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 336-346, March.
    16. Mandell, Svante, 2010. "Carbon Emission Values in Cost Benefit Analyses," Working Papers 2010:4, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
    17. Hollander, Yaron, 2006. "Direct versus indirect models for the effects of unreliability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 699-711, November.
    18. 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.
    19. Hensher, David A., 2006. "Towards a practical method to establish comparable values of travel time savings from stated choice experiments with differing design dimensions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 829-840, December.
    20. Lee, D. B., 2000. "Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 41-50, January.
    21. Salling, Kim Bang & Banister, David, 2009. "Assessment of large transport infrastructure projects: The CBA-DK model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(9-10), pages 800-813, November.
    22. Flyvbjerg, Bent, 2005. "Measuring inaccuracy in travel demand forecasting: methodological considerations regarding ramp up and sampling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 522-530, July.
    23. Turner, RK, 1979. "Cost-benefit analysis--a critique," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 411-419.
    24. Sen, Amartya, 2000. "The Discipline of Cost-Benefit Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 931-52, June.
    25. Tsamboulas, Dimitrios A., 2007. "A tool for prioritizing multinational transport infrastructure investments," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 11-26, January.
    26. Sevcíková, Hana & Raftery, Adrian E. & Waddell, Paul A., 2011. "Uncertain benefits: Application of Bayesian melding to the Alaskan Way Viaduct in Seattle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 540-553, July.
    27. Börjesson, Maria & Fosgerau, Mogens & Algers, Staffan, 2012. "On the income elasticity of the value of travel time," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 368-377.
    28. Quinet, E., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 27-34, January.
    29. Morisugi, H., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in Japan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 35-40, January.
    30. Peter MacKie, 2010. "Cost-Benefit Analysis in Transport: A UK Perspective," OECD/ITF Joint Transport Research Centre Discussion Papers 2010/16, OECD Publishing.
    31. Weitzman, Martin L., 1998. "Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 201-208, November.
    32. Hayashi, Y. & Morisugi, H., 2000. "International comparison of background concept and methodology of transportation project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 73-88, January.
    33. Mackie, Peter & Preston, John, 1998. "Twenty-one sources of error and bias in transport project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7, January.
    34. Hauer, E., 1994. "Can one estimate the value of life or is it better to be dead than stuck in traffic?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 109-118, March.
    35. Nguyen-Hoang, Phuong & Yeung, Ryan, 2010. "What is paratransit worth?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 841-853, December.
    36. Hansson, Sven Ove, 2007. "Philosophical Problems In Cost Benefit Analysis," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(02), pages 163-183, July.
    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 in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Vonk Noordegraaf, Diana & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2014. "Policy implementation lessons from six road pricing cases," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 172-191.
    2. 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.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:49:y:2013:i:c:p:241-255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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