IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v7y2000i1p73-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International comparison of background concept and methodology of transportation project appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Hayashi, Y.
  • Morisugi, H.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:7:y:2000:i:1:p:73-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(00)00015-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Morisugi, Hisa & Ohno, Eiji, 1995. "Proposal of a benefit incidence matrix for urban development projects," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 461-481, August.
    2. Vickerman, R., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies for transport projects in the United Kingdom," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 7-16, January.
    3. Rothengatter, W., 2000. "Evaluation of infrastructure investments in Germany," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 17-25, January.
    4. Quinet, E., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 27-34, January.
    5. Morisugi, H., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in Japan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 35-40, January.
    6. Bristow, A. L. & Nellthorp, J., 2000. "Transport project appraisal in the European Union," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 51-60, January.
    7. Lee, D. B., 2000. "Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 41-50, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Cundric, A. & Kern, T. & Rajkovic, V., 2008. "A qualitative model for road investment appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 225-231, July.
    2. Junn-Yuan Teng & Wen-Chih Huang & Maw-Cherng Lin, 2010. "Systematic budget allocation for transportation construction projects: a case in Taiwan," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 331-361, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Shi, Jing & Zhou, Nian, 2012. "A quantitative transportation project investment evaluation approach with both equity and efficiency aspects," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 93-100.
    5. Nahmias–Biran, Bat-hen & Shiftan, Yoram, 2016. "Towards a more equitable distribution of resources: Using activity-based models and subjective well-being measures in transport project evaluation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 672-684.
    6. Short, Jack & Kopp, Andreas, 2005. "Transport infrastructure: Investment and planning. Policy and research aspects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 360-367, July.
    7. Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Roumboutsos, Athena, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of decision making during construction on transport project outcome," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 369-380, November.
    8. Eda Ustaoglu & Brendan Williams & Laura O. Petrov & Harutyun Shahumyan & Hedwig Van Delden, 2017. "Developing and Assessing Alternative Land-Use Scenarios from the MOLAND Model: A Scenario-Based Impact Analysis Approach for the Evaluation of Rapid Rail Provisions and Urban Development in the Greate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.
    9. Guirao, Begoña & Campa, Juan Luis, 2015. "The effects of tourism on HSR: Spanish empirical evidence derived from a multi-criteria corridor selection methodology," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 37-46.
    10. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    11. Nir Sharav & Yoram Shiftan, 2021. "Optimal Urban Transit Investment Model and Its Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-29, August.
    12. Khraibani, R. & de Palma, A. & Picard, N. & Kaysi, I., 2016. "A new evaluation and decision making framework investigating the elimination-by-aspects model in the context of transportation projects' investment choices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 67-81.
    13. José Manuel Viegas, 2012. "The urban mobility system and regional competitiveness," Chapters, in: Roberta Capello & Tomaz Ponce Dentinho (ed.), Networks, Space and Competitiveness, chapter 2, pages 35-55, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Grimaldi, Raffaele & Beria, Paolo, 2013. "Open issues in the practice of cost benefit analysis of transport projects," MPRA Paper 53766, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Marleau Donais, Francis & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Waygood, E. Owen D. & Lavoie, Roxane, 2019. "Assessing and ranking the potential of a street to be redesigned as a Complete Street: A multi-criteria decision aiding approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-19.
    16. Major, Iván, 2004. "A korlátozó szabályozástól az ösztönző szabályozásig. A közlekedés szabályozása az Európai Unióban és Magyarországon [From restricting regulation to incentive regulation. Transport regulation in th," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 501-529.
    17. te Boveldt, Geert & Keseru, Imre & Macharis, Cathy, 2022. "When monetarisation and ranking are not appropriate. A novel stakeholder-based appraisal method," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 192-205.
    18. Metz, David, 2021. "Economic benefits of road widening: Discrepancy between outturn and forecast," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 312-319.
    19. Morten Skou Nicolaisen & Patrick A. Driscoll, 2016. "An International Review of Ex-Post Project Evaluation Schemes in the Transport Sector," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 1-33, March.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:trapol:v:7:y:2000:i:1:p:73-88. 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/30473/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.