This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Cost--benefit analysis and the European union cohesion fund: On the social cost of capital and labour

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Massimo Florio

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Florio M. (2006) Cost--benefit analysis and the European Union Cohesion Fund: on the social cost of capital and labour, Regional Studies 40, 211--224. Cost--benefit analysis is a formal regulatory requirement for the evaluation of Cohesion Fund projects. It requires the calculation of shadow prices. Observed prices in less-developed European Union regions do not reflect the social opportunity cost of labour and capital because of market failures and policy constraints. The paper discusses simple rules for the calculation of financial and economic discount rates, and of shadow wages, i.e. the opportunity costs of capital and labour, in the context of the appraisal of infrastructure projects part-financed under the Cohesion Fund. It is argued that for the 2007--13 programming period, the European Commission should adopt a unique financial discount rate of 3.5% in real terms, social discount rates of 5.5% for the Convergence regions and 3.5% for Competitiveness regions, and a region-specific shadow wage rate. Cost--benefit analysis Social discount rate Shadow wage Cohesion Fund Florio M. (2006) L'analyse coût-bénéfice et le Fonds de cohésion de l'UE: à propos du coû t social du capital et du travail, Regional Studies 40, 211--224. L'analyse coût-bénéfice est une obligation légale préalable à l'évaluation des projets assistés par le Fonds de cohésion. Elle nécessite le calcul des prix virtuels. Les prix observés dans les zones de l'UE en voie de développement ne reflètent le coû t d'opportunité social, ni du travail, ni du capital, à cause de la distorsion du marché et des contraintes de politique. Cet article cherche à discuter des règles simples visant le calcul des taux d'escompte financiers et économiques, et des salaires virtuels; autrement dit les coû ts d'opportunité du capital et du travail, dans le cadre de l'évaluation des projets d'équipement financés en partie sous l'égide du Fonds de cohésion. On affirme que, pour la période de programmation 2007--13, la Commission européenne devrait adopter un taux d'escompte financier unique de 3,5% en termes réels, des taux d'escompte sociaux de 5,5% pour les régions de convergence et de 3,5% pour les régions de l'Objectif 'compétitivité’, et un taux des salaires virtuels propre à chaque zone. Analyse coût-bénéfice Taux d'escompte social Salaire virtuel Fonds de cohésion Florio M. (2006) Kosten-Nutzenanalyse und der Kohäsionsfond der EU: Bemerkungen zu den Sozialkosten von Kapital und Arbeit, Regional Studies 40, 211--224. Kosten-Nutzenanalyse ist ein formales behö rdliches Erfordernis für die Evaluierung von Kohäsionsfondprojekten. Es bedarf der Berechnung von 'Schattenpreisen’. In weniger entwickelten EU Regionen beobachtete Preise spiegeln nicht die sozialen Opportunitätskosten von Arbeit und Kapital wider aufgrund von Marktversagen und Policybedingten Einsdränkungen. Dieser Aufsatz bespricht einfache Regeln für die Berechnung finanzieller und wirtschaftlicher Diskontsätze und für Schattenlöhne, d.h. die Opportunitätskosten von Kapital und Arbeit im Zusammenhang mit der Einschätzung von Infrastrukturprojekten, die vom Kohäsionsfond teilfinanziert werden. Es wird der Standpunkt vertreten, dass die Europäische Kommission für die Programmperiode 2007--2013 einen einmaligen Finanzdiskontsatz von effektiv 3,5% einführen sollte, einen sozialen Diskontsatz von 5,5% für "Konvergenz” Regionen und 3,5% für "Wettbewerbs” Regionen sowie einen bestimmten regionenspezifisch zugeschnittenen Schattenlohnsatz. Kosten-Nutzenanalyse sozialer Diskontsatz Schattenlohn Kohäsionsfond Florio M. (2006) Análisis coste-beneficio y el Fondo de Cohesión de la UE: sobre el coste social de capital y trabajo, Regional Studies 40, 211--224. Los análisis de costes y beneficios son un requisito formal y reglamentario para llevar a cabo la evaluación de los proyectos del Fondo de Cohesión. Requieren el cálculo de los 'precios sombra’. En los precios de las regiones de la UE menos desarrolladas no queda reflejado el coste de oportunidad social de trabajo y capital debido a fallos de mercado y restricciones polí-- ticas. Aquí se exponen reglas simples para el cálculo de las tasas de descuento, según un valor financiero y económico, y los 'salarios sombra’, es decir, los costes de oportunidad de capital y trabajo, en el ámbito de una valoración de proyectos de infraestructura financiado en parte por el Fondo de Cohesión. Se sostiene que para el periodo de programación 2007--2013, la Comisión Europea debería adoptar una tasa exclusiva de descuento financiero del 3,5% en términos reales, tasas de descuento social del 5,5% para las regiones de Convergencia, un 3,5% para las regiones de Competitividad y una tasa específica de salario sombra para cada región. Análisis de costes y beneficios Tasa de descuento social Salario sombra Fondo de cohesión

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=K6283M60Q37PR818
File Format: text/html
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Regional Studies.

Volume (Year): 40 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
Pages: 211-224
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:40:y:2006:i:2:p:211-224

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=104661

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/subscription.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

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.:

  1. Joseph E. Stiglitz & Raaj Kumar Sah, 1986. "The Social Cost of Labor, and Project Evaluation: A General Approach," NBER Working Papers 1229, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  2. Dreze, Jean & Stern, Nicholas, 1990. "Policy reform, shadow prices, and market prices," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-45, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Andrea MAIRATE & Francesco ANGELINI, 2006. "Cost-benefit analysis and EU cohesion policy," Departemental Working Papers 2006-34, Department of Economics University of Milan Italy. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You too can volunteer for RePEc, for example by encouraging others to register as authors.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-21.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.