New Frontiers in Project Evaluation? A Comment on Devarajan, Squire, and Suthiwart-Narueput
Readers might infer from the paper by Devarajan, Squire, and Suthiwart-Narueput and from Hammer's applications of that methodology to health projects, that the authors are proposing fundamental modifications of the standard techniques and of received theory of cost-benefit analysis (otherwise known as applied welfare economics and in some uses as social or economic project evaluation). Such an inference is not warranted, however. So far as I can see, nearly everything the authors propose fits quite easily within the inherited corpus of applied welfare economics. The steps that they advocate are modifications not of standard cost-benefit analysis, but of habits that have developed over the years and decades both in the World Bank and quite generally among practitioners of economic project evaluation. Hammer nicely summarizes Devarajan, Squire, and Suthiwart-Narueput's main prescription: there should be a firm rationale for public involvement if a project is to be done in the public sector; the project should be compared with a clear "counterfactual"; the fiscal impact of the project should be clearly identified and should be assigned a properly estimated cost; and the issue of fungibility of funds should be clearly addressed in weighing the economic consequences of project loans.
Volume (Year): 12 (1997)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://wbro.oxfordjournals.org/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:wbrobs:v:12:y:1997:i:1:p:73-79. 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: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.