IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v32y2009i1p83-90.html

Qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of complex, emergent programs

Author

Listed:
  • Rogers, Patricia J.
  • Stevens, Kaye
  • Boymal, Jonathan

Abstract

This paper discusses a methodology used for a qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of a complex, emergent program. Complex, emergent programs, where implementation varies considerably over time and across sites to respond to local needs and opportunities, present challenges to conventional methods for cost-benefit evaluation. Such programs are characterized by: ill-defined boundaries of what constitutes the intervention, and hence the resources used; non-standardized procedures; differing short-term outcomes across projects, even within the same long-term goals; and outcomes that are the result of multiple factors and co-production, making counter-factual approaches to attribution inadequate and the use of standardized outcome measures problematic. The paper discusses the advantages and limitations of this method and its implications for cost-benefit evaluation of complex programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogers, Patricia J. & Stevens, Kaye & Boymal, Jonathan, 2009. "Qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of complex, emergent programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 83-90, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:1:p:83-90
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(08)00073-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manning, Matthew & Homel, Ross & Smith, Christine, 2006. "Economic Evaluation of a Community Based Early Intervention Program Implemented in a Disadvantaged Urban Area of Queensland," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 99-119, March/Sep.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M., 2004. "Optimal climate policy is a utopia: from quantitative to qualitative cost-benefit analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 385-393, April.
    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. Mihic, Marko M. & Todorovic, Marija Lj. & Obradovic, Vladimir Lj., 2014. "Economic analysis of social services for the elderly in Serbia: Two sides of the same coin," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-21.
    2. Le Roch, Karine & Trenouth, Lani & Bizouerne, Cécile & Salpéteur, Cécile, 2023. "Methodological choices for an economic evaluation of a combined psychosocial and nutrition treatment intervention for children with severe acute malnutrition: The FUSAM trial in Nepal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    3. Maredia, Mywish K., 2009. "Improving the proof: Evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development," IFPRI discussion papers 929, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Alexei Botchkarev, 2016. "Essential notion of the health economic evaluation: Definition," Economic Analysis Working Papers (2002-2010). Atlantic Review of Economics (2011-2016), Colexio de Economistas de A Coruña, Spain and Fundación Una Galicia Moderna, vol. 2, pages 1-1, December.
    5. Marcin Połom & Maciej Tarkowski & Krystian Puzdrakiewicz & Łukasz Dopierała, 2020. "Is It Possible to Develop Electromobility in Urban Passenger Shipping in Post-Communist Countries? Evidence from Gdańsk, Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, December.

    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. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2010. "Externality or sustainability economics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2047-2052, September.
    3. Peterson, Deborah C., 2006. "Precaution: principles and practice in Australian environmental and natural resource management," Conference Workshop Proceedings 31906, Productivity Commission.
    4. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    5. Nijkamp Peter, 2012. "Behaviour of Humans and Behaviour of Models in Dynamic Space," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 31(2), pages 7-19, June.
    6. Tol, Richard S.J., 2013. "Targets for global climate policy: An overview," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 911-928.
    7. Kousky, Carolyn & Rostapshova, Olga & Toman, Michael & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2009. "Responding to threats of climate change mega-catastrophes," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5127, The World Bank.
    8. Richard S J Tol, 2018. "The Economic Impacts of Climate Change," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 4-25.
    9. Sgouris Sgouridis & Abdulla Kaya & Denes Csala, 2016. "Switching Economics for Physics and the Carbon Price Inflation: Problems in Integrated Assessment Models and their Implications," Papers 1603.06196, arXiv.org.
    10. Sain, Gustavo & Loboguerrero, Ana María & Corner-Dolloff, Caitlin & Lizarazo, Miguel & Nowak, Andreea & Martínez-Barón, Deissy & Andrieu, Nadine, 2017. "Costs and benefits of climate-smart agriculture: The case of the Dry Corridor in Guatemala," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 163-173.
    11. Farrell, Katharine N. & Silva-Macher, Jose Carlos, 2017. "Exploring Futures for Amazonia's Sierra del Divisor: An Environmental Valuation Triadics Approach to Analyzing Ecological Economic Decision Choices in the Context of Major Shifts in Boundary Conditions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 166-179.
    12. Loic Berger & Massimo Marinacci, 2017. "Model Uncertainty in Climate Change Economics," Working Papers 616, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    13. John Gowdy & Roxana Juliá, 2010. "Global Warming Economics in the Long Run: A Conceptual Framework," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(1), pages 117-130.
    14. Oberlack, Christoph & Neumärker, Bernhard, 2013. "A diagnostic approach to the institutional analysis of climate adaptation," The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers 01-2013, University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory.
    15. David Anthoff & Richard Tol, 2014. "Climate policy under fat-tailed risk: an application of FUND," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 220(1), pages 223-237, September.
    16. Marcin Połom & Maciej Tarkowski & Krystian Puzdrakiewicz & Łukasz Dopierała, 2020. "Is It Possible to Develop Electromobility in Urban Passenger Shipping in Post-Communist Countries? Evidence from Gdańsk, Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, December.
    17. Bolognesi, Thomas & Pflieger, Géraldine, 2024. "Do you perceive interdependencies among human activities related to water? Drivers and effects on preferences for participation and regulation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    18. Kits, Gerda J., 2017. "Good for the Economy? An Ecological Economics Approach to Analyzing Alberta’s Bitumen Industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 68-74.
    19. Lim, C.S. Vincent, 2010. "Greener Central Banks: Exploring Possibilities," Staff Papers, South East Asian Central Banks (SEACEN) Research and Training Centre, number sp76, April-Jun.
    20. Rising, James A. & Taylor, Charlotte & Ives, Matthew C. & Ward, Robert E.t., 2022. "Challenges and innovations in the economic evaluation of the risks of climate change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114941, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:1:p:83-90. 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/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.