IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/ctswps/2012_030.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is CBA ranking of transport investments robust?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is often used when many transport investments need to be ranked against each other, for example in national investment planning. However, results are often questioned on claims that the ranking depends crucially on uncertain assumptions about the future, and on methodologically or ethically contestable trade-offs of different types of benefits relative to each other. This paper explores the robustness of CBA rankings of transport investments with respect to two types of uncertainties: relative benefit valuations and scenario assumptions related to car ownership, characteristics and costs. The study is based on CBAs of 479 suggested road and rail investments in Sweden that have been shortlisted for possible inclusion in the national transport investment plan. The CBA ranking turns out to be robust to variations in the studied scenario assumptions. The CBA ranking also turns out to be robust to changes in the relative valuations of different types of benefits – person travel time savings, traffic safety, emissions and freight benefits. We also compare two sets of travel time valuations against each other, one of which differentiated with respect to mode and travel purpose and one which is not, again concluding that the investment ranking is robust.

Suggested Citation

  • Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Lundberg, Mattias, 2012. "Is CBA ranking of transport investments robust?," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:30, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:ctswps:2012_030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.transportportal.se/SWoPEc/CTS2012-30.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parthasarathi, Pavithra & Levinson, David, 2010. "Post-construction evaluation of traffic forecast accuracy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 428-443, November.
    2. Hugosson, Muriel Beser, 2005. "Quantifying uncertainties in a national forecasting model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 531-547, July.
    3. Bristow, A. L. & Nellthorp, J., 2000. "Transport project appraisal in the European Union," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 51-60, January.
    4. Gerard Jong & Andrew Daly & Marits Pieters & Stephen Miller & Ronald Plasmeijer & Frank Hofman, 2007. "Uncertainty in traffic forecasts: literature review and new results for The Netherlands," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 375-395, July.
    5. Holz-Rau, Christian & Scheiner, Joachim, 2011. "Safety and travel time in cost-benefit analysis: A sensitivity analysis for North Rhine-Westphalia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 336-346, March.
    6. Mackie, P.J. & Jara-Díaz, S. & Fowkes, A.S., 0. "The value of travel time savings in evaluation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 91-106, April.
    7. Rodier, Caroline J. & Johnston, Robert A., 2002. "Uncertain socioeconomic projections used in travel demand and emissions models: could plausible errors result in air quality nonconformity?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 613-631, August.
    8. Robert Bain, 2009. "Error and optimism bias in toll road traffic forecasts," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 469-482, September.
    9. Yong Zhao & Kara Maria Kockelman, 2002. "The propagation of uncertainty through travel demand models: An exploratory analysis," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 36(1), pages 145-163.
    10. S. M. Grant-Muller & P. MacKie & J. Nellthorp & A. Pearman, 2001. "Economic appraisal of European transport projects: The state-of-the-art revisited," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 237-261.
    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. Eliasson, Jonas & Savemark, Christian & Franklin, Joel, 2020. "The impact of land use effects in infrastructure appraisal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 262-276.
    2. Van Wee, Bert & Boarnet, Marlon, 2014. "Reaction to the paper Tempest in a Teapot: The exaggerated problem of transport-related residential self-selection as a source of error in empirical studies," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 7(3), pages 81-86.
    3. Mackie, Peter & Worsley, Tom & Eliasson, Jonas, 2014. "Transport appraisal revisited," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 3-18.
    4. Gössling, Stefan & Kees, Jessica & Litman, Todd & Humpe, Andreas, 2023. "The economic cost of a 130 kph speed limit in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Hansson, Lisa, 2020. "Public administrators’ roles in the policy adaptation of transport directives: How knowledge is created and reproduced," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 208-216.
    7. Eliasson, Jonas, 2023. "Tillbaka till framtiden: en nygammal planprocess [Back to the future: a renewed infrastructure planning process]," MPRA Paper 118658, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Börjesson, Maria & Jonsson, R. Daniel & Berglund, Svante & Almström, Peter, 2014. "Land-use impacts in transport appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 82-91.
    9. Lisa Hansson & Lena Nerhagen, 2019. "Regulatory Measurements in Policy Coordinated Practices: The Case of Promoting Renewable Energy and Cleaner Transport in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, March.

    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. Aguas, Oriana & Bachmann, Chris, 2022. "Assessing the effects of input uncertainties on the outputs of a freight demand model," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Börjesson, Maria & Jonsson, R. Daniel & Berglund, Svante & Almström, Peter, 2014. "Land-use impacts in transport appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 82-91.
    3. Westin, Jonas & de Jong, Gerard & Vierth, Inge & Krüger, Niclas & Karlsson, Rune & Johansson, Magnus, 2015. "Baserunning - analyzing the sensitivity and economies of scale of the Swedish national freight model system using stochastic production-consumption-matrices," Working papers in Transport Economics 2015:10, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI), revised 15 Sep 2016.
    4. Morten Skou Nicolaisen & Patrick A. Driscoll, 2016. "An International Review of Ex-Post Project Evaluation Schemes in the Transport Sector," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 1-33, March.
    5. Holz-Rau, Christian & Scheiner, Joachim, 2011. "Safety and travel time in cost-benefit analysis: A sensitivity analysis for North Rhine-Westphalia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 336-346, March.
    6. Gerard Jong & Andrew Daly & Marits Pieters & Stephen Miller & Ronald Plasmeijer & Frank Hofman, 2007. "Uncertainty in traffic forecasts: literature review and new results for The Netherlands," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 375-395, July.
    7. Hoque, Jawad Mahmud & Erhardt, Gregory D. & Schmitt, David & Chen, Mei & Wachs, Martin, 2021. "Estimating the uncertainty of traffic forecasts from their historical accuracy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 339-349.
    8. Manzo, Stefano & Nielsen, Otto Anker & Prato, Carlo Giacomo, 2015. "How uncertainty in input and parameters influences transport model :output A four-stage model case-study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 64-72.
    9. Sanko, Nobuhiro & Morikawa, Takayuki & Nagamatsu, Yoshitaka, 2013. "Post-project evaluation of travel demand forecasts: Implications from the case of a Japanese railway," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 209-218.
    10. David Hartgen, 2013. "Hubris or humility? Accuracy issues for the next 50 years of travel demand modeling," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1133-1157, November.
    11. Parthasarathi, Pavithra & Levinson, David, 2010. "Post-construction evaluation of traffic forecast accuracy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 428-443, November.
    12. Andersson, Matts & Brundell-Freij, Karin & Eliasson, Jonas, 2017. "Validation of aggregate reference forecasts for passenger transport," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 101-118.
    13. 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.
    14. Carlos Oliveira Cruz & Joaquim Miranda Sarmento, 2020. "Traffic forecast inaccuracy in transportation: a literature review of roads and railways projects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1571-1606, August.
    15. Xu, Xiangdong & Chen, Anthony & Wong, S.C. & Cheng, Lin, 2015. "Selection bias in build-operate-transfer transportation project appraisals," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 245-251.
    16. Andersson, Matts & Brundell-Freij, Karin & Eliasson, Jonas, 2016. "Validation of reference forecasts for passenger transport," Working papers in Transport Economics 2016:15, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI), revised 07 Jul 2016.
    17. Walker, Joan L. & Chatman, Daniel & Daziano, Ricardo & Erhardt, Gregory & Gao, Song & Mahmassani, Hani & Ory, David & Sall, Elizabeth & Bhat, Chandra & Chim, Nicholas & Daniels, Clint & Gardner, Brian, 2019. "Advancing the Science of Travel Demand Forecasting," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0v1906ts, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    18. 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.
    19. Thomopoulos, N. & Grant-Muller, S. & Tight, M.R., 2009. "Incorporating equity considerations in transport infrastructure evaluation: Current practice and a proposed methodology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 351-359, November.
    20. Alan T Murray & Ran Wei & Tony H Grubesic, 2014. "An Approach for Examining Alternatives Attributable to Locational Uncertainty," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 41(1), pages 93-109, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cost benefit analysis; Appraisal; Robustness; Decision support.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • R48 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government Pricing and Policy

    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:hhs:ctswps:2012_030. 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: CTS (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.cts.kth.se/ .

    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.