IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/46889.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Appraising the benefits of bottleneck removal in rail transport: a simplified CBA approach

Author

Listed:
  • Beria, Paolo
  • Grimaldi, Raffaele

Abstract

The removal of infrastructure bottlenecks is widely considered among the most profitable interventions, in socio-economic terms, and rail transport is not an exception. However, as outlined for example by RailPAG (2005), the measurement of the related benefits is difficult and no specific manuals indications seem to exist. From a general point of view, by removing a rail bottleneck we expect at least two kinds of benefits: direct benefits to transport users and external benefits to the rest of society (environmental externalities, accidents and congestion) due to the avoidance of possible shift to more impactful transport modes. The first effect is particularly hard to correctly evaluate, especially without a complete transport model, and thus CBAs currently performed might often result biased. The aim of this paper is to propose a simplified approach to estimate the effects of a capacity constraints for a simple rail network, and assess its removal through a CBA. In the first part, we briefly analyse the transport economics literature on the issue. In the following we introduce the proposed methodology, based on the use of a standard logit model, to measure the rail users’ generalised costs with and without the capacity constraint, and the consequent users and social surplus variation. The model is specified initially for a single link and then extended to a more complex network. Then, we outline the other elements to be included into a CBA in addition to surplus variation: rail service performance improvements, external costs associated to road shift and possible wider economic effects. We also discuss the effect of regulation in the distribution of calculated surplus variations.

Suggested Citation

  • Beria, Paolo & Grimaldi, Raffaele, 2013. "Appraising the benefits of bottleneck removal in rail transport: a simplified CBA approach," MPRA Paper 46889, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:46889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/46889/2/MPRA_paper_46889.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eliasson, Jonas & Börjesson, Maria, 2014. "On timetable assumptions in railway investment appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 118-126.
    2. Roger Vickerman, 2007. "Recent Evolution of Research into the Wider Economic Benefits of Transport Infrastructure Investments," OECD/ITF Joint Transport Research Centre Discussion Papers 2007/9, OECD Publishing.
    3. Yukihiro Kidokoro, 2004. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Transport Networks: Theory and Application," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 38(2), pages 275-307, May.
    4. Bertil Hylén & Jari Kauppila & Edouard Chong, 2013. "Road Haulage Charges and Taxes: Summary Analysis and Data Tables 1998-2012," International Transport Forum Discussion Papers 2013/8, OECD Publishing.
    5. Nilsson, Jan-Eric, 2012. "Congestion and scarcity in scheduled transport modes," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:25, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    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. Di Cataldo, Marco & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés, 2016. "What drives employment growth and social inclusion in EU regions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68510, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Gerard de Jong & Reto Tanner & Jeppe Rich & Mikkel Thorhauge & Otto Anker Nielsen & John Bates, 2017. "Modelling production-consumption flows of goods in Europe: the trade model within Transtools3," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Calthrop, Edward & De Borger, Bruno & Proost, Stef, 2010. "Cost-benefit analysis of transport investments in distorted economies," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 850-869, August.
    4. Yahong Liu & Daisheng Tang & Tao Bu & Xinyuan Wang, 2022. "The spatial employment effect of high-speed railway: quasi-natural experimental evidence from China," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(2), pages 333-359, October.
    5. World Bank, 2014. "Regional Economic Impact Analysis of High Speed Rail in China : Main Report," World Bank Publications - Reports 19996, The World Bank Group.
    6. Vickerman, Roger, 2008. "Transit investment and economic development," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 107-115, January.
    7. Kanemoto, Yoshitsugu, 2013. "Second-best cost–benefit analysis in monopolistic competition models of urban agglomeration," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 83-92.
    8. Jiwattanakulpaisarn, Piyapong & Noland, Robert B. & Graham, Daniel J., 2010. "Causal linkages between highways and sector-level employment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 265-280, May.
    9. Eliasson, Jonas & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2019. "Cost-benefit analysis of transport improvements in the presence of spillovers, matching and an income tax," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 1-9.
    10. Bothe, Kristian & Hansen, Høgni Kalsø & Winther, Lars, 2018. "Spatial restructuring and uneven intra-urban employment growth in metro- and non-metro-served areas in Copenhagen," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 21-30.
    11. Margarita Bagamanova & Miguel Mujica Mota & Vittorio Di Vito, 2022. "Exploring the Efficiency of Future Multimodal Networks: A Door-to-Door Case in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Ait Ali, Abderrahman & Warg, Jennifer & Eliasson, Jonas, 2020. "Pricing commercial train path requests based on societal costs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 452-464.
    14. Maarten van 't Riet, 2011. "The link approach to measuring consumer surplus in transport networks," CPB Discussion Paper 199.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    15. Paul Besseling & Maarten van 't Riet, 2009. "Welfare analysis in transport networks," CPB Discussion Paper 130, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. Börjesson, Maria, 2014. "Forecasting demand for high speed rail," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 81-92.
    17. Paal Brevik Wangsness & Kenneth Løvold Rødseth & Wiljar Hansen, 2017. "A review of guidelines for including wider economic impacts in transport appraisal," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 94-115, January.
    18. Piyapong Jiwattanakulpaisarn & Robert B. Noland & Daniel J. Graham, 2012. "Marginal Productivity of Expanding Highway Capacity," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 46(3), pages 333-347, September.
    19. Maarten van 't Riet, 2011. "The link approach to measuring consumer surplus in transport networks," CPB Discussion Paper 199, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    20. Stef Proost & Fay Dunkerley & Saskia Loo & Nicole Adler & Johannes Bröcker & Artem Korzhenevych, 2014. "Do the selected Trans European transport investments pass the cost benefit test?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 107-132, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cost Benefit Analysis; bottleneck; rail; saturation; assessment; infrastructure;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • R42 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government and Private Investment Analysis; Road Maintenance; Transportation Planning

    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:pra:mprapa:46889. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.