IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p4906-d797266.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Dimensional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Prioritizing Railway Station Investments: A General Framework with an Application to the Italian Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Pierluigi Coppola

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Via G. La Masa 1, 20156 Milan, Italy)

  • Diego Deponte

    (Systematica SRL, Via Lovanio 8, 20121 Milan, Italy)

  • Alessandro Vacca

    (Systematica SRL, Via Lovanio 8, 20121 Milan, Italy)

  • Federico Messa

    (Systematica SRL, Via Lovanio 8, 20121 Milan, Italy)

  • Fulvio Silvestri

    (Department of Enterprise Engineering, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Via del Politecnico 1, 00133 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

In recent years, several authors have highlighted the merits of the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), e.g., compared to Cost-Benefits Analysis (CBA), particularly for small projects appraisal (e.g., revamping or extraordinary maintenance interventions) and when the impacts of the project are difficult to value or quantify in monetary terms. CEA is a quite consolidated technique, typically applied in practice when one specific impact prevails over the others. This research extends the concept of CEA to a multi-dimensional decision-making context, outlining a methodological framework that includes several criteria to assess the impacts of railway station revamping in urban contexts. The proposed method has already been applied for the project appraisals of five railway stations in Italy; this paper presents the application to a case study representing the typical configuration of a medium-sized Italian railway station. Results have shown that the proposed approach is a valid tool for both designers and infrastructure managers for prioritizing railway station investments in the presence of multiple strategic objectives that also conflict with each other. A multi-dimensional CEA can provide, in a communicative, lean, and effective way, the information on investment costs and the impacts that different policies, layouts, and technological solutions would have, creating the basis for a more transparent debate on resource allocation priorities. Finally, results have shown that the CEA is not only a method for project assessment, but also a tool for improving and directing the design towards the identification of interventions that allow the achievement of the key objectives set ex ante.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierluigi Coppola & Diego Deponte & Alessandro Vacca & Federico Messa & Fulvio Silvestri, 2022. "Multi-Dimensional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Prioritizing Railway Station Investments: A General Framework with an Application to the Italian Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:4906-:d:797266
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/4906/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/4906/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierluigi Coppola & Fulvio Silvestri, 2021. "Gender Inequality in Safety and Security Perceptions in Railway Stations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Bristow, A. L. & Nellthorp, J., 2000. "Transport project appraisal in the European Union," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 51-60, January.
    3. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Notes on the Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 11791, The World Bank Group.
    4. William K. Jaeger & Thorsten M. Egelkraut, 2011. "Biofuel Economics in a Setting of Multiple Objectives & Unintended Consequences," Working Papers 2011.37, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Ali Enes Dingil & Federico Rupi & Domokos Esztergár-Kiss, 2021. "An Integrative Review of Socio-Technical Factors Influencing Travel Decision-Making and Urban Transport Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Jaeger, William K. & Egelkraut, Thorsten M., 2011. "Biofuel economics in a setting of multiple objectives and unintended consequences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4320-4333.
    7. Jaeger, William K. & Egelkraut, Thorsten M., 2011. "Biofuel Economics in a Setting of Multiple Objectives & Unintended Consequences," Energy: Resources and Markets 108203, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    8. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Where to Use Cost Effectiveness Techniques Rather Than Cost Benefit Analysis," World Bank Publications - Reports 11795, The World Bank Group.
    9. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Notes on the Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 11787, The World Bank Group.
    10. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2019. "A review of cost–benefit analysis and multicriteria decision analysis from the perspective of sustainable transport in project evaluation," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 327-358, November.
    11. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Notes on the Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects : Fiscal Impacts," World Bank Publications - Reports 11794, The World Bank Group.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Noel, Michael D. & Roach, Travis, 2017. "Marginal reductions in vehicle emissions under a dual-blend ethanol mandate: Evidence from a natural experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 45-54.
    2. Nair, Sujith & Paulose, Hanna, 2014. "Emergence of green business models: The case of algae biofuel for aviation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 175-184.
    3. Chiara Pancotti & Matteo Pedralli & Geert Smit & Silvia Vignetti, 2020. "Understanding transport project appraisal in its institutional dimension," Working Papers 201902, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    4. Iyabo Adeola Olanrele & Adedoyin I. Lawal & Ezekiel Oseni & Ahmed Oluwatobi Adekunle & Bukola, B. Lawal-Adedoyin & Crystal O. Elleke & Racheal Ojeka-John & Henry Nweke-Love, 2020. "Accessing the Impacts of Contemporary Development in Biofuel on Agriculture, Energy and Domestic Economy: Evidence from Nigeria," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(5), pages 469-478.
    5. Kannapiran C. Arjunan, 2019. "Non‐monotonic NPV Function Leads to Spurious NPVs and Multiple IRR Problems: A New Method that Resolves these Problems," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 38(1), pages 56-69, March.
    6. Giovanni Alessandro Cappelli & Fabrizio Ginaldi & Davide Fanchini & Sebastiano Andrea Corinzia & Salvatore Luciano Cosentino & Enrico Ceotto, 2021. "Model-Based Assessment of Giant Reed ( Arundo donax L.) Energy Yield in the Form of Diverse Biofuels in Marginal Areas of Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-24, May.
    7. Rajagopal, D. & Plevin, R. & Hochman, G. & Zilberman, D., 2015. "Multi-objective regulations on transportation fuels: Comparing renewable fuel mandates and emission standards," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 359-369.
    8. Ji, Xi & Long, Xianling, 2016. "A review of the ecological and socioeconomic effects of biofuel and energy policy recommendations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 41-52.
    9. E, Jiaqiang & Pham, Minhhieu & Zhao, D. & Deng, Yuanwang & Le, DucHieu & Zuo, Wei & Zhu, Hao & Liu, Teng & Peng, Qingguo & Zhang, Zhiqing, 2017. "Effect of different technologies on combustion and emissions of the diesel engine fueled with biodiesel: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 620-647.
    10. Trumbo, Jennifer L. & Tonn, Bruce E., 2016. "Biofuels: A sustainable choice for the United States' energy future?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 147-161.
    11. Moschini, GianCarlo & Cui, Jingbo & Lapan, Harvey E., 2012. "Economics of Biofuels: An Overview of Policies, Impacts and Prospects," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-28, December.
    12. Zhao, Qiankun & Cai, Ximing & Mischo, William & Ma, Liyuan, 2020. "How do the research and public communities view biofuel development?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    13. Stefan Walter, 2018. "The Regional Impact of Biofuel Economics," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 12(3), pages 369-386, August.
    14. Janda, Karel & Kristoufek, Ladislav & Zilberman, David, "undated". "Biofuels: review of policies and impacts," CUDARE Working Papers 120415, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    15. Živković, Snežana B. & Veljković, Milan V. & Banković-Ilić, Ivana B. & Krstić, Ivan M. & Konstantinović, Sandra S. & Ilić, Slavica B. & Avramović, Jelena M. & Stamenković, Olivera S. & Veljković, Vlad, 2017. "Technological, technical, economic, environmental, social, human health risk, toxicological and policy considerations of biodiesel production and use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 222-247.
    16. Ayesha Mushtaq & Muhammad Asif Hanif & Muhammad Zahid & Umer Rashid & Zahid Mushtaq & Muhammad Zubair & Bryan R. Moser & Fahad A. Alharthi, 2021. "Production and Evaluation of Fractionated Tamarind Seed Oil Methyl Esters as a New Source of Biodiesel," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-13, November.
    17. Kulisic, Biljana & Dimitriou, Ioannis & Mola-Yudego, Blas, 2021. "From preferences to concerted policy on mandated share for renewable energy in transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    18. Karel Janda & Ladislav Kristoufek & David Zilberman, 2012. "Biofuels: policies and impacts," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 58(8), pages 372-386.
    19. Sharp, Benjamin E. & Miller, Shelie A., 2014. "Estimating maximum land use change potential from a regional biofuel industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 261-269.
    20. Roach, Travis, 2015. "Hidden regimes and the demand for carbon dioxide from motor-gasoline," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PB), pages 306-315.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:4906-:d:797266. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.