IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mst/wpaper/201302.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The use of ex post Cost-Benefit Analysis to assess the long-term effects of Major Infrastructure Projects

Author

Abstract

This paper draws and expands from a recent ex-post evaluation carried out for the European Commission aimed at assessing the long term effects produced by a sample of ten major infrastructures in the Transport and Environment sectors and interpreting the key determinants of the observed performance. This evaluation study offered a unique opportunity to draw conclusions on the value of performing ex-post evaluations and to test an innovative evaluation design combining cost-benefit analysis (CBA) with qualitative assessment and adopting a long-run perspective (30 years), which extends into both the past and the future, and requires a mix of retrospective and prospective analysis. This paper presents the potential of ex-post CBA to assess long term impacts of major infrastructure projects and discusses some methodological and institutional implications related to its use.

Suggested Citation

  • Massimo Florio & Silvia Vignetti, 2013. "The use of ex post Cost-Benefit Analysis to assess the long-term effects of Major Infrastructure Projects," Working Papers 201302, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:mst:wpaper:201302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.csilmilano.com/docs/WP2013_02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Julie Pellegrin & Emanuela Sirtori, 2012. "Methodologies to assess the impact of infrastructure projects in international development evaluation," Working Papers 201202, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    3. Rajaram, Anand & Le, Tuan Minh & Biletska, Nataliya & Brumby, Jim, 2010. "A diagnostic framework for assessing public investment management," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5397, The World Bank.
    4. Massimo Florio & Davide Sartori, 2010. "Getting Incentives Right: do we need ex post CBA?," Working Papers 201001, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    5. Massimo FLORIO & Silvia VIGNETTI, 2003. "Cost-benefit analysis of infrastructure projects in an enlarged European Union: an incentive-oriented approach," Departmental Working Papers 2003-13, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    6. Massimo FLORIO, 2006. "Multi-government cost-benefit analysis: shadow prices and incentives," Departmental Working Papers 2006-37, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    7. Robert Bain, 2009. "Error and optimism bias in toll road traffic forecasts," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 469-482, September.
    8. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2007. "Policy and Planning for Large-Infrastructure Projects: Problems, Causes, Cures," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(4), pages 578-597, August.
    9. 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.
    10. Michela Cella & Massimo Florio, 2007. "Hierarchical contracting in grant decisions: ex-ante and ex-post evaluation in the context of the EU Structural Funds," UNIMI - Research Papers in Economics, Business, and Statistics unimi-1059, Universitá degli Studi di Milano.
    11. Massimo Florio, 2007. "Introduction: Multi-government Cost–Benefit Analysis, Shadow Prices and Incentives," Chapters, in: Massimo Florio (ed.), Cost–Benefit Analysis and Incentives in Evaluation, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Jenkins, Glenn P, 1997. "Project Analysis and the World Bank," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(2), pages 38-42, May.
    13. Michela Cella & Massimo Florio, 2009. "Hierarchical contracting in grant decisions: ex-ante and ex-post evaluation in the context of the EURegional Policy," Working Papers 171, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Jun 2009.
    14. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461.
    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. Sallam, Walid & Ahmed, Osama, 2020. "The socio-economic assessment to evaluate the potentiality of developing the rural community in Upper Egypt," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(2), pages 143-165.
    2. Petr Halámek & Radka Matuszková & Michal Radimský, 2021. "Modernisation of Regional Roads Evaluated Using Ex-Post CBA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Osama Ahmed & Walid Sallam, 2020. "Assessing the Potential of Improving Livelihoods and Creating Sustainable Socio-Economic Circumstances for Rural Communities in Upper Egypt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-23, August.

    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. Ginés Rus & M. Socorro, 2010. "Infrastructure Investment and Incentives with Supranational Funding," Transition Studies Review, Springer;Central Eastern European University Network (CEEUN), vol. 17(3), pages 551-567, September.
    2. Osama Ahmed & Walid Sallam, 2020. "Assessing the Potential of Improving Livelihoods and Creating Sustainable Socio-Economic Circumstances for Rural Communities in Upper Egypt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-23, August.
    3. Massimo Florio & Silvia Vignetti, 2008. "Building a bridge across CBA traditions: the contribution of EU Regional Policy," Working Papers 200908, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    4. Chiara Pancotti & Matteo Pedralli & Geert Smit & Silvia Vignetti, 2020. "Understanding transport project appraisal in its institutional dimension," Working Papers 201902, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    5. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2006. "Cost Overruns and Demand Shortfalls in Urban Rail and Other Infrastructure," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 9-30, February.
    6. Stefano Moroni, 2014. "Grandi e piccole opere Per un?azione pubblica responsabile," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(3), pages 103-112.
    7. Cantarelli, C.C. & Flyvbjerg, B. & Buhl, S.L., 2012. "Geographical variation in project cost performance: the Netherlands versus worldwide," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 324-331.
    8. Love, Peter E.D. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Ahiaga-Dagbui, Dominic D., 2019. "On de-bunking ‘fake news’ in a post truth era: Why does the Planning Fallacy explanation for cost overruns fall short?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 397-408.
    9. Walker, Joan L. & Chatman, Daniel & Daziano, Ricardo & Erhardt, Gregory & Gao, Song & Mahmassani, Hani & Ory, David & Sall, Elizabeth & Bhat, Chandra & Chim, Nicholas & Daniels, Clint & Gardner, Brian, 2019. "Advancing the Science of Travel Demand Forecasting," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0v1906ts, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    10. Martijn Leijten, 2013. "Real-world decision-making on mega-projects: politics, bias and strategic behaviour," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 4, pages 57-82, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Thomopoulos, N. & Grant-Muller, S. & Tight, M.R., 2009. "Incorporating equity considerations in transport infrastructure evaluation: Current practice and a proposed methodology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 351-359, November.
    12. Verweij, Stefan & van Meerkerk, Ingmar & Korthagen, Iris A., 2015. "Reasons for contract changes in implementing Dutch transportation infrastructure projects: An empirical exploration," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 195-202.
    13. Hoque, Jawad Mahmud & Erhardt, Gregory D. & Schmitt, David & Chen, Mei & Wachs, Martin, 2021. "Estimating the uncertainty of traffic forecasts from their historical accuracy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 339-349.
    14. Thomas Feldhoff, 2018. "Visual Representations of Radiation Risk and the Question of Public (Mis-)Trust in Post-Fukushima Japan," Societies, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Konrad Nübel & Michael Max Bühler & Thorsten Jelinek, 2021. "Federated Digital Platforms: Value Chain Integration for Sustainable Infrastructure Planning and Delivery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Parthasarathi, Pavithra & Levinson, David, 2010. "Post-construction evaluation of traffic forecast accuracy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 428-443, November.
    17. Evgenios Tassopoulos & Sotirios Theodoropoulos, 2014. "Residual Value and its Importance in Concession Agreements for Infrastructure Problems," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 32-40.
    18. Athias, Laure & Nunez, Antonio, 2008. "The more the merrier? Number of bidders, information dispersion, renegotiation and winner’s curse in toll road concessions," MPRA Paper 10539, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Zhou, You & Zhang, Lingzhu & Chiaradia, Alain J F, 2021. "An adaptation of reference class forecasting for the assessment of large-scale urban planning vision, a SEM-ANN approach to the case of Hong Kong Lantau tomorrow," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. Miller, Michael & Szimba, Eckhard, 2015. "How to avoid unrealistic appraisal results? A concept to reflect the occurrence of risk in the appraisal of transport infrastructure projects," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 65-75.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cost-benefit analysis; Ex-post evaluation; Infrastructures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • H54 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Infrastructures
    • R58 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Regional Development Planning and Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mst:wpaper:201302. 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: Marinella Manghina (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csilmit.html .

    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.