Florio, M. (ed.): Cost–Benefit Analysis and Incentives in Evaluation—The Structural Funds of the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-286
Author(s):  
Giacomo Corneo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Structural Funds

scholarly journals Dr Torben Holvad

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-13
Author(s):  
Aránzazu Berbey Álvarez
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Multicriteria Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Data Envelopment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Transport Economics ◽  
European University

Torben Holvad is Analysis Team Leader at the European Union Agency for Railways (France). He obtained Economics degrees from Copenhagen University (MSc) and the European University Institute in Florence (PhD). He has more than 30 years of experience in applied economic analysis. His skills and expertise correspond to backgrounds like: Quantitative methods, Data Envelopment Analysis, Impact Assessment, Cost Benefit Analysis, Transport Economics, Multicriteria analysis, Economics of regulation, Data analysis, Health economics.

scholarly journals Cost-Benefit Analysis and European Union Cohesion Policy: Economic Versus Financial Returns in Investment Project Appraisal

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Florio ◽  
Valentina Morretta ◽  
Witold Willak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Rate Of Return ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cohesion Policy

This paper investigates the role of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in the context of the European Union (EU) Cohesion Policy. After presenting the EU policy framework and the CBA guidelines adopted by the European Commission, we perform an empirical analysis drawing from a dataset of around 1000 major project applications, submitted during the period 2007–2013 by 22 European countries, and representing almost €180 billion of investment. A distinctive feature of the current CBA approach adopted by the European Commission is that applications for funding must provide a forecast of both the project’s financial rate of return (FRR) and economic rate of return (ERR). While the former represents the financial profitability of the project from a private investors’ perspective, the latter reveals its socio-economic benefits for the whole society. The difference between ERR and FRR mainly depends on the use of shadow prices, the inclusion of externalities and other nonmarket effects in the estimation of ERR, whilst the FRR is based on market prices. We find that, on average, the FRR is slightly negative ($-2.9$%) and the ERR is positive (16.2%). ERR and FRR are positively correlated on average with differences across sectors. We discuss these findings and suggest further research needs.

scholarly journals A cost/benefit analysis of self-care initiatives in the European Union – who benefits, who gains?

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
H Ostermann ◽  
A Renner ◽  
P Schneider ◽  
J Bobek ◽  
S Vogler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Self Care ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Benefit Analysis

scholarly journals A cost/benefit analysis of self-care initiatives in the European Union: who gains, who loses?

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. O5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Theresa Renner ◽  
Julia Bobek ◽  
Herwig Ostermann ◽  
Peter Schneider ◽  
Sabine Vogler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Self Care ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Benefit Analysis

Precaution, Proportionality, and Cost/Benefit Analysis: False Analogies

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 281-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Rose–Ackerman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Proportionality Principle

The Politics of Precaution by David Vogel, and the edited volume, The Reality of Precaution each compare the United States with Europe over a range of regulatory areas. Vogel claims that the US and Europe changed places in recent years with Europe becoming more precautionary than the US. The edited volume covers a wider range of topics and finds that the results are mixed. The evidence of diversity in the edited volume appears convincing, but this essay argues that both volumes too narrowly focus on the precautionary principle. Rather it argues for a broader context that confronts precaution both with the proportionality principle, which is a mainstay of European Union law, and with the limitations of cost/benefit analysis and Impact Assessment. It unpacks the normative underpinnings of these concepts to suggest a broader frame for policy analysis.

Improving Assessment of Transport Policies by Dynamic Cost-Benefit Analysis

2003 ◽  
Vol 1839 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schade ◽  
Werner Rothengatter
Keyword(s):  
Network Effects ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Dynamic Assessment ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Transport Infrastructure ◽  
Transport Sector ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Dynamic Approach ◽  
Economic Sectors

In the history of cost-benefit analysis (CBA), macroeconomic and micro-economic foundations have been developed. The latter has dominated in transport CBA during the last decades. The most widely used CBA approach can be characterized as comparative static and based on separate partial modeling. However, when it comes to significant indirect effects in the economic, social, and environmental systems connected with the transport system, alternative approaches to the microeconomic approach become inevitable. A system dynamics platform was developed that allows for a dynamic CBA integrating the most important indirect effect of transport policies. The approach was tested with large infrastructure programs and transport policy packages. Results of the dynamic approach reveal that the choice of the most favorable policy can change over time and depend on the time horizon defined for the analysis. In particular the dynamic approach allows for a clear allocation of costs and benefits to periods of time, which might be valuable information for policy acceptance and implementation. This research is integrated within a stream of European Commission projects on integrated and dynamic assessment, starting with the Assessment of Transport Strategies project (ASTRA) and extended by the projects Transport Infrastructure and Policy: A Macroeconomic Analysis for the European Union (TIPMAC) and Integrated Appraisal of Spatial Economic and Network Effects of Transport Investments and Policies (IASON). IASON focuses on analysis of indirect, second-round, or induced benefits and costs that occur through feedback effects between the transport sector and other economic sectors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document