IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Transport Infrastructure, Spatial General Equilibrium and Welfare


  • Jose Carlos Melendez-Hidalgo


  • Piet Rietveld


  • Erik Verhoef



Large-scale investments in transport infrastructure have been traditionally evaluated assuming the equivalence between direct and indirect economic effects (Jara-Diaz,1986), which is only correct under -generally non-guaranteed- perfect competition assumptions. Despite this common practice there is still no consensus amongst economists as to how the benefits and costs of large infrastructure projects should be determined. The discussions regarding the desirability, for instance, of the Betuwe railway line, the fifth runway at Schiphol Airport, the North-South underground railway in Amsterdam etc. are illustrative of this. The focus has been, in particular, on the magnitude of ‘indirect’ and ‘strategic’ effects, that is effects on parties other than the direct users of the infrastructure (indirect effects) and those factors that have a favorable effect on the long-term development of the (regional) economy, such as effects relating to firm location and demographics (strategic effects). Focusing on general equilibrium, increasing returns and imperfect competition modeling approach this paper aims to throw light on this subject matter by examining how the social benefits in terms of efficiency resulting from improvements to the infrastructure can be determined in an imperfect regional economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Carlos Melendez-Hidalgo & Piet Rietveld & Erik Verhoef, 2004. "Transport Infrastructure, Spatial General Equilibrium and Welfare," ERSA conference papers ersa04p426, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p426

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p426. 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: (Gunther Maier). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.