IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1805.12106.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Report for the Edinburgh Tram Inquiry

Author

Listed:
  • Bent Flyvbjerg
  • Alexander Budzier

Abstract

This report reviews the Edinburgh tram project's risk management. Projects frequently overrun their cost and timelines and fall short on intended benefits. Cost, schedule, and benefit risk of projects need to be carefully considered to avoid this. The report describes and evaluates risk assessment and management for the Edinburgh tram. The report was produced as part of the Edinburgh Tram Inquiry. Keywords: risk assessment, risk management, infrastructure, megaprojects, optimism bias, strategic misrepresentation, planning fallacy, behavioral science.

Suggested Citation

  • Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier, 2018. "Report for the Edinburgh Tram Inquiry," Papers 1805.12106, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1805.12106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.12106
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Amy C. Edmondson, 2003. "Speaking Up in the Operating Room: How Team Leaders Promote Learning in Interdisciplinary Action Teams," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 1419-1452, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Flyvbjerg, Bent, 2016. "The Fallacy of Beneficial Ignorance: A Test of Hirschman’s Hiding Hand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 176-189.
    5. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2014. "What You Should Know About Megaprojects, and Why: An Overview," Papers 1409.0003, arXiv.org.
    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. Love, Peter E.D. & Sing, Michael C.P. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Newton, Sidney, 2019. "The cost performance of transportation projects: The fallacy of the Planning Fallacy account," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-20.
    2. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Ansar, Atif & Budzier, Alexander & Buhl, Søren & Cantarelli, Chantal & Garbuio, Massimo & Glenting, Carsten & Holm, Mette Skamris & Lovallo, Dan & Lunn, Daniel & Molin, Eric & Rønnes, 2018. "Five things you should know about cost overrun," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 174-190.

    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. Alexander Budzier & Bent Flyvbjerg & Andi Garavaglia & Andreas Leed, 2019. "Quantitative Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis of Nuclear Waste Storage," Papers 1901.11123, arXiv.org.
    2. Love, Peter E.D. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Ahiaga-Dagbui, Dominic D., 2019. "On de-bunking ‘fake news’ in a post truth era: Why does the Planning Fallacy explanation for cost overruns fall short?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 397-408.
    3. Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier, 2019. "Report for the Commission of Inquiry Respecting the Muskrat Falls Project," Papers 1901.03698, arXiv.org.
    4. Chantal C. Cantarelli & Bent Flybjerg & Eric J. E. Molin & Bert van Wee, 2013. "Cost overruns in Large-Scale Transportation Infrastructure Projects: Explanations and Their Theoretical Embeddedness," Papers 1307.2176, arXiv.org.
    5. Ginés de Rus & Javier Campos & Daniel Graham & M. Pilar Socorro & Jorge Valido, 2020. "Evaluación Económica de Proyectos y Políticas de Transporte: Metodología y Aplicaciones. Parte 1: Metodología para el análisis coste-beneficio de proyectos y políticas de transporte," Working Papers 2020-11, FEDEA.
    6. Agnieszka Huterska, 2017. "Public-Private Partnership in Building Sustainable Development of the Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodship," European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 3, September.
    7. Petter Osmundsen & Kristin Helen Roll, 2016. "Rig Rates and Drilling Speed: Reinforcing Effects," CESifo Working Paper Series 5895, CESifo.
    8. 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.
    9. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Bester, Dirk W., 2021. "The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 395-419, October.
    10. 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.
    11. EEA Wolf & Wouter Van Dooren, 2018. "‘Time to move on’ or ‘taking more time’? How disregarding multiple perspectives on time can increase policy-making conflict," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(2), pages 340-356, March.
    12. Christos Ellinas & Christos Nicolaides & Naoki Masuda, 2022. "Mitigation strategies against cascading failures within a project activity network," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 383-400, May.
    13. Ika, Lavagnon A., 2018. "Beneficial or Detrimental Ignorance: The Straw Man Fallacy of Flyvbjerg’s Test of Hirschman’s Hiding Hand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 369-382.
    14. C. Guccio & G. Pignataro & I. Rizzo, 2012. "Determinants of adaptation costs in procurement: an empirical estimation on Italian public works contracts," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(15), pages 1891-1909, May.
    15. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Ansar, Atif & Budzier, Alexander & Buhl, Søren & Cantarelli, Chantal & Garbuio, Massimo & Glenting, Carsten & Holm, Mette Skamris & Lovallo, Dan & Lunn, Daniel & Molin, Eric & Rønnes, 2018. "Five things you should know about cost overrun," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 174-190.
    16. Dejan Makovšek & Marian Moszoro, 2018. "Risk pricing inefficiency in public–private partnerships," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 298-321, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Øglend, Atle & Osmundsen, Petter & Lorentzen, Sindre, 2016. "Cost Overrun at the Norwegian Continental Shelf: The element of surprise," UiS Working Papers in Economics and Finance 2016/3, University of Stavanger.
    19. Volden, Gro Holst, 2018. "Public project success as seen in a broad perspective," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 109-117.
    20. Love, Peter E.D. & Sing, Michael C.P. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Newton, Sidney, 2019. "The cost performance of transportation projects: The fallacy of the Planning Fallacy account," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-20.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk assessment; risk management; infrastructure; megaprojects; optimism bias; strategic misrepresentation; planning fallacy; behavioral science.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:1805.12106. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.