Does uncertainty make cost-benefit analyses pointless? |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Division of Transport Economics, The Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI) and Örebro University School of Business, Sweden;2. Department of Transport Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden;1. Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan;2. Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, 38040, Pakistan;3. Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Government College University, Allama Iqbal Road, 38000, Faisalabad, Pakistan;4. Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), P.O. Box 128, Jhang Road, Faisalabad, Pakistan;5. University of Wuppertal, Institute of Foundation Engineering, Water- and Waste-Management, School of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Soil- and Groundwater-Management, Pauluskirchstraße 7, 42285, Wuppertal, Germany;6. Korea Biochar Research Center and School of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, 200-701, South Korea;1. Department of Financial Management, National Defense University, Beitou, Taipei, 11258, Taiwan;2. Department of Accounting, Soochow University, Shihlin, Taipei, 11102, Taiwan;3. Department of Accounting, National Yunlin University of Science & Technology, Douliou, Yunlin, 64002, Taiwan;1. Programa de Energia, Universidad Autonoma de la Ciudad de Mexico, C.P. 03100, Delegacion Benito Juarez, Mexico, D.F, Mexico;2. Instituto de Ingenieria, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Ciudad Universitaria, C.P. 04510, Delegacion Coyoacan, Mexico, D.F, Mexico;1. Department of Agronomy, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan;2. Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan;3. The UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia;4. College of Food and Agricultural Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia |
| |
| Abstract: | Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is widely used in public decision making on infrastructure investments. However, the demand forecasts, cost estimates, benefit valuations and effect assessments that are conducted as part of CBAs are all subject to various degrees of uncertainty. The question is to what extent CBAs, given such uncertainties, are still useful as a way to prioritize between infrastructure investments, or put differently, how robust the policy conclusions of CBA are with respect to uncertainties. Using simulations based on real data on national infrastructure plans in Sweden and Norway, we study how investment selection and total realized benefits change when decisions are based on CBA assessments subject to several different types of uncertainty. Our results indicate that realized benefits and investment selection are surprisingly insensitive to all studied types of uncertainty, even for high levels of uncertainty. The two types of uncertainty that affect results the most are uncertainties about investment cost and transport demand. Provided that decisions are based on CBA outcomes, reducing uncertainty is still worthwhile, however, because of the huge sums at stake. Even moderate reductions of uncertainties about unit values, investment costs, future demand and project effects may increase the realized benefits infrastructure investment plans by tens or hundreds of million euros. We conclude that, despite the many types of uncertainties, CBA is able to fairly consistently separate the wheat from the chaff and hence contribute to substantially improved infrastructure decisions. |
| |
| Keywords: | Cost-benefit analysis Infrastructure investments Uncertainty Robustness R42 R48 |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
