IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v43y2009i9-10p800-813.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of large transport infrastructure projects: The CBA-DK model

Author

Listed:
  • Salling, Kim Bang
  • Banister, David

Abstract

This paper presents a newly developed decision support model to assess transport infrastructure projects: CBA-DK. The model combines use of conventional cost-benefit analysis to produce aggregated single point estimates, with quantitative risk analysis using Monte Carlo simulation to produce interval results. The embedded uncertainties within traditional CBA such as ex-ante based investment costs and travel time savings are of particular concern. The paper investigates these two impacts in terms of the Optimism Bias principle which is used to take account of the underestimation of construction costs and the overestimation of travel time savings. The CBA-DK methodological approach has been used to apply suitable probability distribution functions on the uncertain parameters, thus resulting in feasibility risk assessment moving from point to interval results. The proposed assessment model makes use of both deterministic and stochastic based information. Decision support as illustrated in this paper aims to provide assistance in the development and ultimately the choice of action, while accounting for the uncertainties surrounding transport appraisal schemes. The modelling framework is illustrated by the use of a case study appraising airport and runway alternatives in the capital of Greenland - Nuuk. The case study has been conducted in cooperation with the Home Rule Authorities of Greenland.

Suggested Citation

  • Salling, Kim Bang & Banister, David, 2009. "Assessment of large transport infrastructure projects: The CBA-DK model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(9-10), pages 800-813, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:43:y:2009:i:9-10:p:800-813
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965-8564(09)00094-9
    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. 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.
    2. Mackie, Peter & Preston, John, 1998. "Twenty-one sources of error and bias in transport project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7, January.
    3. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    4. Bent Flyvbjerg & Mette K. Skamris holm & Søren L. Buhl, 2003. "How common and how large are cost overruns in transport infrastructure projects?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 71-88, January.
    5. Wardman, Mark, 2004. "Public transport values of time," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 363-377, October.
    6. Fosgerau, Mogens, 2007. "Using nonparametrics to specify a model to measure the value of travel time," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 842-856, November.
    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. Salling, Kim Bang & Leleur, Steen, 2011. "Transport appraisal and Monte Carlo simulation by use of the CBA-DK model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 236-245, January.
    2. 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, pages 67-81.
    3. 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.
    4. Galit Cohen-Blankshtain & Eran Feitelson, 2011. "Light rail routing: do goals matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 343-361, March.
    5. Chow, Joseph Y.J. & Regan, Amelia C. & Ranaiefar, Fatemeh & Arkhipov, Dmitri I., 2011. "A network option portfolio management framework for adaptive transportation planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 765-778, October.
    6. Sevcíková, Hana & Raftery, Adrian E. & Waddell, Paul A., 2011. "Uncertain benefits: Application of Bayesian melding to the Alaskan Way Viaduct in Seattle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 540-553, July.
    7. 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.
    8. Salling, Kim Bang & Leleur, Steen, 2015. "Accounting for the inaccuracies in demand forecasts and construction cost estimations in transport project evaluation," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 8-18.
    9. Barfod, Michael Bruhn & Salling, Kim Bang, 2015. "A new composite decision support framework for strategic and sustainable transport appraisals," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1-15.
    10. Michael Bruhn Barfod & Robin van den Honert & Kim Bang Salling, 2016. "Modeling Group Perceptions Using Stochastic Simulation: Scaling Issues in the Multiplicative AHP," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 453-474, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Niek Mouter & Jan Annema & Bert Wee, 2015. "Managing the insolvable limitations of cost-benefit analysis: results of an interview based study," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 277-302, March.
    13. Welde, Morten, 2011. "Demand and operating cost forecasting accuracy for toll road projects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 765-771, September.

    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:transa:v:43:y:2009:i:9-10:p:800-813. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.