IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v32y2009i1p83-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of complex, emergent programs

Author

Listed:
  • Rogers, Patricia J.
  • Stevens, Kaye
  • Boymal, Jonathan

Abstract

This paper discusses a methodology used for a qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of a complex, emergent program. Complex, emergent programs, where implementation varies considerably over time and across sites to respond to local needs and opportunities, present challenges to conventional methods for cost-benefit evaluation. Such programs are characterized by: ill-defined boundaries of what constitutes the intervention, and hence the resources used; non-standardized procedures; differing short-term outcomes across projects, even within the same long-term goals; and outcomes that are the result of multiple factors and co-production, making counter-factual approaches to attribution inadequate and the use of standardized outcome measures problematic. The paper discusses the advantages and limitations of this method and its implications for cost-benefit evaluation of complex programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogers, Patricia J. & Stevens, Kaye & Boymal, Jonathan, 2009. "Qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of complex, emergent programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 83-90, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:1:p:83-90
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(08)00073-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manning, Matthew & Homel, Ross & Smith, Christine, 2006. "Economic Evaluation of a Community Based Early Intervention Program Implemented in a Disadvantaged Urban Area of Queensland," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 99-119, March/Sep.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M., 2004. "Optimal climate policy is a utopia: from quantitative to qualitative cost-benefit analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 385-393, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marcin Połom & Maciej Tarkowski & Krystian Puzdrakiewicz & Łukasz Dopierała, 2020. "Is It Possible to Develop Electromobility in Urban Passenger Shipping in Post-Communist Countries? Evidence from Gdańsk, Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Maredia, Mywish K., 2009. "Improving the proof: Evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development," IFPRI discussion papers 929, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Mihic, Marko M. & Todorovic, Marija Lj. & Obradovic, Vladimir Lj., 2014. "Economic analysis of social services for the elderly in Serbia: Two sides of the same coin," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-21.
    4. Alexei Botchkarev, 2016. "Essential notion of the health economic evaluation: Definition," Economic Analysis Working Papers (2002-2010). Atlantic Review of Economics (2011-2016), Colexio de Economistas de A Coruña, Spain and Fundación Una Galicia Moderna, vol. 2, pages 1-1, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2010. "Externality or sustainability economics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2047-2052, September.
    3. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    4. Nijkamp Peter, 2012. "Behaviour of Humans and Behaviour of Models in Dynamic Space," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 31(2), pages 7-19, June.
    5. Tol, Richard S.J., 2006. "The Polluter Pays Principle and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Climate Change: An Application of Fund," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12058, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. Kousky, Carolyn & Rostapshova, Olga & Toman, Michael & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2009. "Responding to threats of climate change mega-catastrophes," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5127, The World Bank.
    7. Sain, Gustavo & Loboguerrero, Ana María & Corner-Dolloff, Caitlin & Lizarazo, Miguel & Nowak, Andreea & Martínez-Barón, Deissy & Andrieu, Nadine, 2017. "Costs and benefits of climate-smart agriculture: The case of the Dry Corridor in Guatemala," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 163-173.
    8. Marcin Połom & Maciej Tarkowski & Krystian Puzdrakiewicz & Łukasz Dopierała, 2020. "Is It Possible to Develop Electromobility in Urban Passenger Shipping in Post-Communist Countries? Evidence from Gdańsk, Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, December.
    9. Richard S.J. Tol, 2011. "The Social Cost of Carbon," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 419-443, October.
    10. Kits, Gerda J., 2017. "Good for the Economy? An Ecological Economics Approach to Analyzing Alberta’s Bitumen Industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 68-74.
    11. Rising, James A. & Taylor, Charlotte & Ives, Matthew C. & Ward, Robert E.t., 2022. "Challenges and innovations in the economic evaluation of the risks of climate change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114941, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Botzen, W.J.W. & Bouwer, L.M. & van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., 2010. "Climate change and hailstorm damage: Empirical evidence and implications for agriculture and insurance," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 341-362, August.
    13. Jeroen Bergh, 2007. "Evolutionary thinking in environmental economics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 521-549, October.
    14. W. Botzen & Jeroen Bergh, 2014. "Specifications of Social Welfare in Economic Studies of Climate Policy: Overview of Criteria and Related Policy Insights," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 1-33, May.
    15. Tol, Richard S.J., 2013. "Targets for global climate policy: An overview," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 911-928.
    16. John Gowdy & Aneel Salman, 2007. "Climate Change and Economic Development: A Pragmatic Approach (Invited Lecture)," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 46(4), pages 337-350.
    17. Rising, James A. & Taylor, Charlotte & Ives, Matthew C. & Ward, Robert E.T., 2022. "Challenges and innovations in the economic evaluation of the risks of climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    18. Gowdy, John M., 2008. "Behavioral economics and climate change policy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 632-644, December.
    19. David Anthoff & Richard Tol, 2014. "Climate policy under fat-tailed risk: an application of FUND," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 220(1), pages 223-237, September.
    20. Lejano, Raul P. & Newbery, Nicola & Ciolino, Maegan & Newbery, David, 2019. "Sustainability and incommensurability: Narrative policy analysis with application to urban ecology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.

    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:eee:epplan:v:32:y:2009:i:1:p:83-90. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.