Economic appraisal of European transport projects: the state-of-the-art revisited

Abstract

Substantial investment has been made at national and European level in transport infrastructure over the past 50 years and is likely to continue in the future. The need to appraise transport projects in economic and social terms has developed alongside this in both scope and complexity. The state-of-the-art in the economic appraisal of transport projects is reviewed, progress is assessed and future challenges are identi® ed. The review addresses the general framework, treatment of major impacts, presentation of outputs and issues such as uncertainty. It draws on national practice in Western European countries, which varies substantially re¯ecting a range of cultural and economic diOE erences. Some points of commonality exist and the principle of monetizing direct transport impacts is generally accepted. Progress has been made towards the measurement of environmental impacts, but the assessment of the wider impacts remains underdeveloped. Increased sophistication and complexity has brought increasing data and presentation requirements, where computerized decision support methods have potential. Many challenges exist for the future of appraisal and the review is concluded with a discussion of some key issues. At the heart of these is the continuing debate over the relative roles of national and European government in decision-making and resource allocation.

Measuring Regional Cohesion Effects of Large-scale Transport Infrastructure Investments: An Accessibility Approach

“…However, this concern has not been translated to the practice of evaluation, where cohesion is not usually included among the evaluation criteria of transport infrastructure assessment methodologies (Grant-Muller et al, 2001). …”

“…However, the treatment of distributive effects of transport infrastructure is uneven and scarce (Grant-Muller et al, 2001). In addition, some authors argue that certain investments may lead to increasing rather than reducing regional disparities (Martín et al, 2004;Vickerman et al, 1999).…”

Sustainability Assessment of Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Review of Existing Tools and Methods

“…Some authors support the adequacy of applying the CBA to evaluate public projects, and study its influence (e.g. Grant-Muller, Mackie, Nellthorp, & Pearman, 2001;Pearce & Nash, 1981), while others discuss some disagreements about its usefulness as a decision-making support tool and review the problems surrounding the use of this tool in the appraisal of large-scale infrastructure projects (e.g. Jones, Moura, & Domingos, 2014;Vickerman, 2007).…”

A method to evaluate equitable accessibility: combining ethical theories and accessibility-based approaches

“…Most countries have adopted cost-benefit analysis (CBA) as the preferred evaluation methodology across all aspects of transport decision-making (Hayashi and Morisugi 2000;Bristow and Nellthorp 2000;Grant-Muller et al 2001; Thomopoulos and Grant-Muller 2013). However, CBA generally ignores the distribution effects of such decisions, such as how they affect different regions and/or social groups.…”