IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepops/53.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regional differences in UK transport BCRs: an empirical assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolás González-Pampillón
  • Henry G. Overman

Abstract

The UK government uses a Value for Money (VfM) framework to help allocate infrastructure expenditure. At the core of this framework is a benefit to cost ratio (BCR) that is calculated using a set of established monetised impacts and costs, according to Green Book guidance. As part of the debate around transport spending in the UK, it has been argued that these BCRs are biased towards London and the South East. We use a set of BCRs, compiled for the Eddington study, to consider the determinants of variation in BCRs and whether these differ systematically across UK regions. Our descriptive analysis controls for basic scheme characteristics and finds no strong evidence of significant regional differences. While the BCRs in Eddington form the basis for claims made in existing studies a larger set of schemes, evaluated according to current guidelines and including BCRs for unfunded schemes, would be needed to perform a more definitive analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolás González-Pampillón & Henry G. Overman, 2020. "Regional differences in UK transport BCRs: an empirical assessment," CEP Occasional Papers 53, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepops:53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/occasional/op053.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Transport appraisal; Value for Money; benefit to cost ratio; spatial disparities;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R40 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - General
    • R42 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government and Private Investment Analysis; Road Maintenance; Transportation Planning

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cep:cepops:53. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/occasional-papers/ .

    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.