IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Methodologies to assess the impact of infrastructure projects in international development evaluation

Ex-post evaluation of infrastructure projects is attempted by international and national organisations in different ways. Qualitative case studies, relying on documentary analysis, interviews and surveys, are regularly carried out, for example, by the European Commission, the World Bank, the European Investment Bank and Regional Development Banks. The aim of case studies is to provide an in-depth understanding of the project context and performance. The World Bank has also put in place a rating system to assess the performance of all investment operations financed, allowing for immediate comparability of results across sectors, countries, macro-regions, programmes and lending instruments. Some institutions and countries (e.g. the European Commission, the World Bank and the United Kingdom) make use of quantitative methods to measure infrastructure projects effects, like ex-post CBA. This method is mostly used to re-assess ex-ante appraisal results with more up-to-date data. An innovative way of integrating ex-post CBA and qualitative evidence is offered by the recent Commission’s evaluation of major projects financed in the 1994-1999 period. Such research project allowed to study in a structured way not only project effects, but also determinant mechanisms of success or failure, leading to meaningful and generalised lessons about infrastructure project performance. The evaluation design and specificities characterising this approach are described and the main advantages highlighted.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.csilmilano.com/docs/WP2012_02.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Centre for Industrial Studies (CSIL) in its series Working Papers with number 201202.

as
in new window

Length: 17 pages
Date of creation: 09 Mar 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:mst:wpaper:201202
Contact details of provider: Postal: Corso Monforte 15, 20122 Milano MI
Phone: + 39 02 796630
Fax: + 39 02 780703
Web page: http://www.csilmilano.com/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Gramlich, Edward M, 1994. "Infrastructure Investment: A Review Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1176-96, September.
  2. Chiara Del Bo & Massimo Florio, 2010. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Rates of Return of Infrastructure Projects: Evidence from International Organizations," Transition Studies Review, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 587-610, September.
  3. Jenkins, Glenn P, 1997. "Project Analysis and the World Bank," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(2), pages 38-42, May.
  4. Julie Pellegrin & Gelsomina Catalano, 2010. "What lessons to draw from multiple regional case studies: between comparability and specificity," Working Papers 201002, Centre for Industrial Studies (CSIL).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mst:wpaper:201202. 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: (Marinella Manghina)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.