IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v7y2000i1p41-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, D. B.

Abstract

"Projects", as the term is used here, are capital investments--from resurfacing streets to multi-billion dollar construction--that create transportation infrastructure. "Methods" are primarily benefit-cost analysis, although other frameworks have been, and still remain, in use. Most projects are constructed by public agencies and authorities, primarily at the state and local level, but the federal government is the dominant source of evaluation guidance because most transportation projects use some share of federal funds. Benefit-cost analysis (BCA or BC) is a decision framework for government agencies to use in considering the desirability of taking alternative actions, whether investment, operations, or regulation. This survey describes the use of BCA by US transportation agencies, comparing theory, published guidance, and actual practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, D. B., 2000. "Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 41-50, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:7:y:2000:i:1:p:41-50
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(00)00011-1
    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. Robert W. Hahn, 1998. "Policy Watch: Government Analysis of the Benefits and Costs of Regulation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 201-210, Fall.
    2. repec:reg:rpubli:234 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mohring, Herbert, 1993. "Maximizing, measuring, and not double counting transportation-improvement benefits: A primer on closed- and open-economy cost-benefit analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 413-424, December.
    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. Xu, Wangtu & Lin, Weihua, 2016. "Selecting the public transit projects with PCA-DP technique: The example of Xiamen City," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 56-71.
    2. Jan Anne Annema & Koen Frenken & Carl Koopmans & Maarten Kroesen, 2017. "Relating cost-benefit analysis results with transport project decisions in the Netherlands," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 109-127, March.
    3. Cundric, A. & Kern, T. & Rajkovic, V., 2008. "A qualitative model for road investment appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 225-231, July.
    4. Major, Iván, 2004. "A korlátozó szabályozástól az ösztönző szabályozásig. A közlekedés szabályozása az Európai Unióban és Magyarországon [From restricting regulation to incentive regulation. Transport regulation in th," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 501-529.
    5. Marleau Donais, Francis & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Waygood, E. Owen D. & Lavoie, Roxane, 2019. "Assessing and ranking the potential of a street to be redesigned as a Complete Street: A multi-criteria decision aiding approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-19.
    6. Hayashi, Y. & Morisugi, H., 2000. "International comparison of background concept and methodology of transportation project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 73-88, January.
    7. Zhou, You & Jessup, Eric & Lang, Xiaodong, 2019. "Improved methodology for benefit estimation of highway pavement projects," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    8. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    9. Lauro J. Martinez & Nilesh N. Joshi & James H. Lambert, 2011. "Diagramming qualitative goals for multiobjective project selection in large‐scale systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 73-86, March.
    10. Junn-Yuan Teng & Wen-Chih Huang & Maw-Cherng Lin, 2010. "Systematic budget allocation for transportation construction projects: a case in Taiwan," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 331-361, March.
    11. Jan Anne Annema, 2013. "The use of CBA in decision-making on mega-projects: empirical evidence," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 13, pages 291-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Nijland, H. A. & Van Kempen, E. E. M. M. & Van Wee, G. P. & Jabben, J., 2003. "Costs and benefits of noise abatement measures," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 131-140, April.
    13. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Chien, Ya-Ling & Nguyen, Ngoc-Mai & Truong, Dinh-Nhat, 2018. "Pricing policy of floating ticket fare for riding high speed rail based on time-space compression," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 179-192.
    14. Shi, Jing & Zhou, Nian, 2012. "A quantitative transportation project investment evaluation approach with both equity and efficiency aspects," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 93-100.
    15. Eda Ustaoglu & Brendan Williams & Laura O. Petrov & Harutyun Shahumyan & Hedwig Van Delden, 2017. "Developing and Assessing Alternative Land-Use Scenarios from the MOLAND Model: A Scenario-Based Impact Analysis Approach for the Evaluation of Rapid Rail Provisions and Urban Development in the Greate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.
    16. Shladover, Steven E. & Miller, Mark A. & Yin, Yafeng & Balvanyos, Tunde & Bernheim, Lauren & Fishman, Stefanie R. & Amirouche, Farid & Mahmudi, Khurran T. & Gonzalez-Mohino, Pedro & Solomon, Joseph & , 2004. "Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle-Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: Case Study Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt7227d024, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    17. Zhou, You & Zhang, Lingzhu & JF Chiaradia, Alain, 2022. "Estimating wider economic impacts of transport infrastructure Investment: Evidence from accessibility disparity in Hong Kong," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 220-235.
    18. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2013. "Ranking the substantive problems in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis practice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 241-255.
    19. Nir Sharav & Yoram Shiftan, 2021. "Optimal Urban Transit Investment Model and Its Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-29, August.
    20. Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Roumboutsos, Athena, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of decision making during construction on transport project outcome," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 369-380, November.

    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. Matthias Finger & Rolf W. Künneke (ed.), 2011. "International Handbook of Network Industries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12961.
    2. Parker, David, 2001. "Economic Regulation: A Preliminary Literature Review and Summary of Research Questions Arising," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30616, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    3. Mak, James & Sheehey, Christopher & Toriki, Shannon, 2010. "The passenger vessel services act and America's cruise tourism industry," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 18-26.
    4. Ginés de Rus & M. Pilar Socorro & Jorge Valido & Javier Campos, 2023. "Cost–Benefit Analysis of Transport Projects: Theoretical Framework and Practical Rules," Springer Books, in: Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects, chapter 0, pages 11-42, Springer.
    5. Kirkpatrick, Colin & Parker, David, 2004. "Regulation and the Privatisation of Water Services in Developing Countries: Assessing the Impact of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30600, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    6. Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "The Political Economy of Environmental Policy," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 1, pages 3-30, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Jérôme Massiani, 2020. "Towards Improved Guidelines for Cost–Benefit Analysis of Sport and Cultural Events," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 39(3), pages 270-289, September.
    8. Leyla Gamidullaeva & Saniyat Agamagomedova, 2023. "How Administrative Regulation Institutional Factors Affect the Business Efficiency in a Region: A Case Study of Russian Regions," Economies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Eliasson, Jonas & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2019. "Cost-benefit analysis of transport improvements in the presence of spillovers, matching and an income tax," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 1-9.
    10. Jackie Krafft & Evens Salies, 2008. "Why and how should innovative industries with high consumer switching costs be re-regulated?," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2008-04, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    11. Panina, L.V. & Mohri, K. & Uchiyama, T., 1997. "Giant magneto-impedance (GMI) in amorphous wire, single layer film and sandwich film," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 241(1), pages 429-438.
    12. Lakshmanan, T.R., 2011. "The broader economic consequences of transport infrastructure investments," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12.
    13. Sumit K. MAJUMDAR, 2014. "Regulation And Job Creation: An Analysis Of Institutional Change And Its Consequences," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(2), pages 305-325, June.
    14. Lenka Gregorová & Milan Žák, 2008. "Byrokratická bariéra kvality regulace [Bureaucratic constraint of the quality of regulation]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2008(2), pages 196-228.
    15. Hansen, Wiljar & Johansen, Bjørn Gjerde, 2017. "Regional repercussions of new transport infrastructure investments: An SCGE model analysis of wider economic impacts," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 38-49.
    16. Mackie, Peter & Preston, John, 1998. "Twenty-one sources of error and bias in transport project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7, January.
    17. Gunnar Prause & Eunice Omolola Olaniyi, 2019. "A compliance cost analysis of the SECA regulation in the Baltic Sea," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(4), pages 1907-1921, June.
    18. Truong, Truong P. & Hensher, David A., 2012. "Linking discrete choice to continuous demand within the framework of a computable general equilibrium model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1177-1201.
    19. Grimaldi, Raffaele & Beria, Paolo, 2013. "Open issues in the practice of cost benefit analysis of transport projects," MPRA Paper 53766, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Catarina Figueira & David Parker, 2011. "Infrastructure Liberalization: Challenges to the New Economic Paradigm in the Context of Developing Countries," Chapters, in: Matthias Finger & Rolf W. Künneke (ed.), International Handbook of Network Industries, chapter 27, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    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:eee:trapol:v:7:y:2000:i:1:p:41-50. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    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.