IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v9y2002i2p143-154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Big decisions, big risks. Improving accountability in mega projects

Author

Listed:
  • Bruzelius, Nils
  • Flyvbjerg, Bent
  • Rothengatter, Werner

Abstract

In terms of risk, many appraisals of very large infrastructure investments assume, or pretend to assume, that infrastructure policies and projects exist in a predictable Newtonian world of cause and effect where things go according to plan. In reality, the world of policy and project preparation and implementation is a highly stochastic one where things happen only with a certain probability and rarely turn out as originally intended. The failure to reflect the probabilistic reality of investment preparation and implementation is a central reason for the poor track record that can be documented for many major projects. The article describes lessons and recommendations on how to improve accountability in decision making on very large infrastructure investments in Denmark and Germany. The conventional approach to infrastructure investments is replaced by an alternative focusing on accountability. Redrawing the borderlines of private and public involvement, four specific measures to increase accountability are suggested and detailed: (1) Transparency, (2) Performance specifications, (3) Explication of regulatory regimes, and (4) Involvement of risk capital. The decision on whether or not to build a multi-billion dollar fixed link across the Baltic Sea connecting Scandinavia and Germany is used as an illustrative case. The cyclical process about the promotion of the German MAGLEV technology gives another good example for identifying basic failures in the political process. Beyond these examples from two countries, the approach developed is likely to be relevant for other major projects in other countries as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruzelius, Nils & Flyvbjerg, Bent & Rothengatter, Werner, 2002. "Big decisions, big risks. Improving accountability in mega projects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 143-154, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:9:y:2002:i:2:p:143-154
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(02)00014-8
    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. Benedikt Mandel & Marc Gaudry & Werner Rothengatter, 1997. "A disaggregate Box-Cox Logit mode choice model of intercity passenger travel in Germany and its implications for high-speed rail demand forecasts," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 31(2), pages 99-120.
    2. Helm, Dieter, 1994. "British Utility Regulation: Theory, Practice, and Reform," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 10(3), pages 17-39, Autumn.
    3. Kenneth J. Arrow & Robert C. Lind, 1974. "Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 3, pages 54-75, Palgrave Macmillan.
    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. Geneviève Zembri-Mary & Virginie Engrand-Linder, 2023. "Urban planning law in the face of the Olympic challenge: Between innovation and criticism of exceptional urban regeneration," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 38(4), pages 369-388, June.
    2. Bartlomiej Rokicki, 2022. "Cost Underruns in Major Road Transport Infrastructure Projects—The Surprising Experience of Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Ionel PREDA & Cezar-Petre SIMION, 2019. "The Risks Of Public Procurement In Romania," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(1), pages 133-141, November.
    4. Lehtonen, Markku, 2019. "Ecological Economics and Opening up of Megaproject Appraisal: Lessons From Megaproject Scholarship and Topics for a Research Programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 148-156.
    5. Farida Saleem & Imran Murtaza & Shabir Hyder & Muhammad Imran Malik, 2020. "Public Health and Project Management: Do Projects Deliver?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-11, October.
    6. te Boveldt, Geert & Van Raemdonck, Koen & Macharis, Cathy, 2018. "A new railway tunnel under Brussels? Assessing political feasibility and desirability with competence-based multi criteria analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 30-39.
    7. Hannes Thees, 2020. "Towards Local Sustainability of Mega Infrastructure: Reviewing Research on the New Silk Road," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-35, December.
    8. Marcus Hübscher, 2022. "Planning behind Closed Doors: Unlocking Large-Scale Urban Development Projects Using the Stakeholder Approach on Tenerife, Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, March.
    9. Giuliano Marella & Valentina Antoniucci, 2019. "Time Overrun in Public Works—Evidence from North-East Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Tuna Taşan‐Kok, 2010. "Entrepreneurial Governance: Challenges Of Large‐Scale Property‐Led Urban Regeneration Projects," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 101(2), pages 126-149, April.
    11. Josef Wijk & Itay Fischhendler, 2017. "The construction of urgency discourse around mega-projects: the Israeli case," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(3), pages 469-494, September.
    12. Dean, M. & Hickman, R. & Chen, C.-L., 2019. "Testing the application of participatory MCA: The case of the South Fylde Line," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 62-70.
    13. 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.
    14. Lordan-Perret, Rebecca & Bärenbold, Rebekka & Weigt, Hannes & Rosner, Robert, 2023. "An ex-ante method to verify commercial U.S. nuclear power plant decommissioning cost estimates," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PB).
    15. Bert van Wee, 2011. "Transport and Ethics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14281.
    16. Khwaja Mateen Mazher & Albert P. C. Chan & Rafiq M. Choudhry & Hafiz Zahoor & David J. Edwards & Ahmed M. Ghaithan & Awsan Mohammed & Mubashir Aziz, 2022. "Identifying Measures of Effective Risk Management for Public–Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, October.
    17. Malik Khalfan & Neda Azizi & Omid Haass & Tayyab Maqsood & Istiaq Ahmed, 2022. "Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, May.
    18. Macário, Rosário & Ribeiro, Joana & Costa, Joana Duarte, 2015. "Understanding pitfalls in the application of PPPs in transport infrastructure in Portugal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 90-99.
    19. Locatelli, Giorgio & Invernizzi, Diletta Colette & Brookes, Naomi J., 2017. "Project characteristics and performance in Europe: An empirical analysis for large transport infrastructure projects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 108-122.
    20. Joseph Sturm & Mashrur Chowdhury & Anne Dunning & Jennifer Ogle, 2011. "Analysis of cost estimation disclosure in environmental impact statements for surface transportation projects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 525-544, May.
    21. Roland Andersson & Bo Söderberg, 2012. "Financing roads and railways with decentralized real estate taxes: the case of Sweden," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 48(3), pages 839-853, June.
    22. Alpkokin, Pelin & Capar, Murat Samil, 2019. "Dispute boards in Turkey for infrastructure projects," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-1.
    23. Murakami, Jin & Matsui, Yurika & Kato, Hironori, 2016. "Airport rail links and economic productivity: Evidence from 82 cities with the world’s 100 busiest airports," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 89-99.
    24. Julien Brunel, 2004. "Stochastic Risk vs. Policy Oriented Uncertainties: The Case of the Alpine Crossings," Post-Print halshs-00095852, HAL.
    25. Andrius Montrimas & Jurgita Bruneckienė & Vaidas Gaidelys, 2021. "Beyond the Socio-Economic Impact of Transport Megaprojects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-29, July.

    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. Rausser, Gordon C. & de Janvry, Alain & Schmitz, Andrew & Zilberman, David D., 1980. "Principal issues in the evaluation of public research in agriculture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt74v9m7dh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Reinhard Mechler & Stefan Hochrainer & Asbjørn Aaheim & Håkon Salen & Anita Wreford, 2010. "Modelling economic impacts and adaptation to extreme events: Insights from European case studies," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 737-762, October.
    3. Bruno CRUZ & Aude POMMERET, 2002. "Does public investment reduce private investment risk ? A real option approach," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2002039, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    4. Tirelli, Mario, 2006. "The evaluation of public investments under uncertainty," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 188-198, December.
    5. Gollier, Christian, 2016. "Gamma discounters are short-termist," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 83-90.
    6. Edward C. F. Wilson & Miranda Mugford & Garry Barton & Lee Shepstone, 2016. "Efficient Research Design," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(3), pages 335-348, April.
    7. Carsten Helm, 1998. "International Cooperation Behind the Veil of Uncertainty – The Case of Transboundary Acidification," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(2), pages 185-201, September.
    8. Yuri Biondi, 2009. "Capital budgeting under relational contracting: optimal ranking and duration criteria for schemes of concession, project-financing and public-private partnership," Post-Print hal-00404305, HAL.
    9. Augusto de la Torre & Alain Ize, 2010. "Containing Systemic Risk: Paradigm-Based Perspectives on Regulatory Reform," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Fall 2010), pages 25-64, August.
    10. HEIFETZ, Aviad & MINELLI, Enrico & POLEMARCHAKIS, Heracles, 1999. "Arbitrage and equilibrium with exchangeable risks," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1999046, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    11. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2018. "Pareto efficient taxation and expenditures: Pre- and re-distribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 101-119.
    12. Laszlo Goerke, 2011. "Commodity tax structure under uncertainty in a perfectly competitive market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 203-219, July.
    13. George R. Zodrow, 2019. "Taxation, Uncertainty and the Choice of a Consumption Tax Base," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: George R Zodrow (ed.), TAXATION IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Selected Essays of George R. Zodrow, chapter 8, pages 227-237, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. Thorsten Beckers & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2003. "Konzessionsmodelle für Fernstraßen in Deutschland: eine ökonomische Analyse der Risikoallokation beim F- und A-Modell," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 388, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    15. Rodrigo Nobre Fernandez & André Carraro & Gabrielito Menezes & Giácomo Balbinotto Neto & Eduardo Tillmann, 2014. "Design Contract For Public-Privatepartnerships: A Theoretical Model For Brazilian Hospitals," Anais do XL Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 40th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 062, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    16. Mirman, Leonard J. & Santugini, Marc, 2013. "Firms, shareholders, and financial markets," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 152-164.
    17. Paul A. Grout, 2003. "Public and Private Sector Discount Rates in Public-Private Partnerships," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(486), pages 62-68, March.
    18. repec:tur:wpaper:3 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. James W. Hughes & Michael J. Moore & Edward A. Snyder, 2002. ""Napsterizing" Pharmaceuticals: Access, Innovation, and Consumer Welfare," NBER Working Papers 9229, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Lopes-Bento, Cindy, 2013. "Value for money? New microeconometric evidence on public R&D grants in Flanders," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 76-89.
    21. Christoph Heinzel & Ralph Winkler, 2011. "Distorted Time Preferences and Time-to-Build in the Transition to a Low-Carbon Energy Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 217-241, June.

    More about this item

    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:trapol:v:9:y:2002:i:2:p:143-154. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    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.