IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qed/dpaper/4536.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analyse Couts-Avantages Pour Les Decisions D’Investissement Chapitre 4:L’réduction Et Les Critères D'investissement Alternatifs

Author

Listed:
  • Glenn P. Jenkins

    (Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada and Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus)

  • Chun-Yan kuo

    (Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada)

  • Arnold C. Harberger

    (University of California, Los Angeles, USA)

Abstract

Ce chapitre traite des critères d’investissement alternatifs couramment utilisés dans l’évaluation des projets d’investissement. La valeur actuelle nette (VAN) d’un critère de projet est largement acceptée par les comptables, les analystes financiers et les économistes comme celle qui permet de choisir le bon projet dans tous les domaines. Toutefois, certains décideurs se sont fréquemment appuyés sur d'autres critères tels que le taux de rendement interne, le rapport coûts-avantages, la période de remboursement et le ratio de capacité du service de la dette. Les forces et les faiblesses de ces critères sont examinées dans le présent chapitre afin de démontrer pourquoi le critère VAN est le plus fiable.

Suggested Citation

  • Glenn P. Jenkins & Chun-Yan kuo & Arnold C. Harberger, 2020. "Analyse Couts-Avantages Pour Les Decisions D’Investissement Chapitre 4:L’réduction Et Les Critères D'investissement Alternatifs," Development Discussion Papers 2020-04, JDI Executive Programs.
    • Handle: RePEc:qed:dpaper:4536
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cri-world.com/publications/qed_dp_4536.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Evaluation des Investissements; Taux de remise; Evaluation du projet;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate

    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:qed:dpaper:4536. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Mark Babcock (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/qedquca.html .

    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.