Cost-benefit rules for transport projects when labor supply is endogenous and taxes are distortionary
We embed a stylized traffic model within a general equilibrium model in which labor supply is endogenous and income taxes are distortionary. Within this framework we derive simple rules for performing a cost-benefit analysis that can be applied knowing only the output of the traffic model and a factor that accounts for the labor market distortion in a consistent manner. Thus the rules that we derive should be applicable in the large number of cost-benefit analyses that are performed based on the output of traffic models. Such analyses are routinely performed and guide the allocation of a large share of public investment in many countries of the world as well as the assessment of policies such as road user charging. We find that the rules for leisure transport are exactly the same as in a conventional CBA that includes the marginal cost of public funds. For business travel and commuting we find new rules as a result of the assumption that transport costs have the same distortionary effect as income taxes.
|Date of creation:||18 Jun 2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
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.:
- Ninette Pilegaard & Mogens Fosgerau, 2008.
"Cost Benefit Analysis of a Transport Improvement in the Case of Search Unemployment,"
Journal of Transport Economics and Policy,
University of Bath, vol. 42(1), pages 23-42, January.
- Pilegaard, Ninette & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2008. "Cost benefit-analysis of a transport improvement in the case of search unemployment," MPRA Paper 10037, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Sandmo, Agnar, 1998. "Redistribution and the marginal cost of public funds," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 365-382, December. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)