IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v92y1997i1-2p145-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Barely Revealed Preference behind Road Investment Priorities

Author

Listed:
  • Fridstrom, Lasse
  • Elvik, Rune

Abstract

An attempt is made to reveal the preference of decision makers within the regional Norwegian public roads administration. The order of priority assigned to the respective, competing public road investment opportunities within the various countries (provinces) is studied by means of a rank order multinomial logit model. Explanatory variables used include cost, benefit, and a variety of attributes characterizing the individual investment projects. Although statistically significant, cost and benefit appear to be of only marginal importance for the priorities set. More weight is attached to cost than to benefit. Smaller projects are preferred to larger, given the benefit-cost ratio. In general, the models estimated are able to explain only a relatively small share of the priority setting made. Copyright 1997 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Fridstrom, Lasse & Elvik, Rune, 1997. "The Barely Revealed Preference behind Road Investment Priorities," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 92(1-2), pages 145-168, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:92:y:1997:i:1-2:p:145-68
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0048-5829/contents
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elvik, Rune, 2013. "Paradoxes of rationality in road safety policy," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 62-70.
    2. repec:spr:lsprsc:v:10:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s12076-016-0175-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mackie, Peter & Worsley, Tom & Eliasson, Jonas, 2014. "Transport appraisal revisited," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 3-18.
    4. Leitham, Scott & McQuaid, Ronald W. & D. Nelson, John, 2000. "The influence of transport on industrial location choice: a stated preference experiment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 515-535, September.
    5. Knut Sandberg Eriksen, 2011. "Do road investments lead to economic growth?," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1613, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Karine Nyborg & Inger Spangen, 2000. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Democratic Ideal," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 26, pages 83-93.
    7. repec:eee:ecotra:v:13:y:2018:i:c:p:36-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Sandberg Hanssen, Thor-Erik & Jørgensen, Finn, 2015. "Transportation policy and road investments," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 49-57.
    9. Jussila Hammes, Johanna, 2015. "Political economics or Keynesian demand-side policies: What determines transport infrastructure investment in Swedish municipalities?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 49-60.
    10. Asplund, Disa & Eliasson, Jonas, 2016. "Does uncertainty make cost-benefit analyses pointless?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 195-205.
    11. Mouter, Niek, 2017. "Dutch politicians’ attitudes towards Cost-Benefit Analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-10.
    12. Nyborg, Karine, 2014. "Project evaluation with democratic decision-making: What does cost–benefit analysis really measure?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 124-131.
    13. Laird, James J. & Venables, Anthony J., 2017. "Transport investment and economic performance: A framework for project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-11.
    14. Jussila Hammes , Johanna & Nilsson, Jan-Eric, 2015. "The allocation of transport infrastructure in Swedish municipalities: welfare maximization, political economy or both?," Working papers in Transport Economics 2015:4, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    15. Adanu, Kwami & Hoehn, John P. & Norris, Patricia & Iglesias, Emma, 2012. "Voter decisions on eminent domain and police power reforms," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 187-194.
    16. Siren, Anu & Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard, 2015. "Immense changes in traffic – Considerable stability in discourses. Road speed in Danish parliamentary documents 1900–2010," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-7.
    17. Salvador Bertomeu & Antonio Estache, 2016. "Unbundling Political and Economic Rationality: a Non-Parametric Approach Tested on Spain," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-17, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Nyborg, Karine, 2000. "Project analysis as input to public debate: Environmental valuation versus physical unit indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 393-408, September.
    19. Jussila Hammes, Johanna & Nilsson, Jan-Eric, 2016. "The allocation of transport infrastructure in Swedish municipalities: Welfare maximization, political economy or both?," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 7, pages 53-64.
    20. repec:eee:ecotra:v:13:y:2018:i:c:p:27-35 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:kap:pubcho:v:92:y:1997:i:1-2:p:145-68. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.