Empirical Damage Relationships and Benefit-Cost Analysis for the Seismic Retrofit of URM Buildings

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 1053-1074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon Paxton ◽  
Kenneth J. Elwood ◽  
Jason M. Ingham
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Pacific Northwest ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Seismic Retrofit ◽  
Construction Costs ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Damage Data ◽  
Strong Candidate ◽  
Observed Damage ◽  
Benefit Cost

Benefit-cost analyses for the seismic retrofit of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings in downtown Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, were undertaken, considering the seismic hazard, building value, occupant/pedestrian exposure, a variety of strengthening measures, and local construction costs. The analyses are underpinned by building motion-damage relationships developed based on observed damage in past earthquakes in California and New Zealand. The considered upgrading measures ranged from parapet bracing to comprehensive seismic upgrades consistent with local practices. Parapet bracing and other partial retrofits were shown to have favorable benefit-cost ratios and thus be strong candidate measures for risk mitigation programs. Full upgrades were shown to have less favorable benefit-cost ratios. While applied to Victoria, the generality of the methodology and the use of observed damage data from California and New Zealand make the findings of this study particularly relevant for similar locations throughout the Pacific Northwest and abroad.

scholarly journals Benefit-Cost Analysis of the Seismic Risk Mitigation for a Region with Moderate Seismicity: The Case of Tiberias, Israel

2014 ◽  
Vol 85 ◽  
pp. 536-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsi-Hsien Wei ◽  
Mirosław J. Skibniewski ◽  
Igal M. Shohet ◽  
Stav Shapira ◽  
Limor Aharonson-Daniel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Seismic Risk ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Moderate Seismicity ◽  
Seismic Risk Mitigation ◽  
Benefit Cost

scholarly journals Nuclear War as a Global Catastrophic Risk

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Scouras
Keyword(s):  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
Catastrophic Risk ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Existential Risk ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Nuclear Winter ◽  
Complete Collapse

AbstractNuclear war is clearly a global catastrophic risk, but it is not an existential risk as is sometimes carelessly claimed. Unfortunately, the consequence and likelihood components of the risk of nuclear war are both highly uncertain. In particular, for nuclear wars that include targeting of multiple cities, nuclear winter may result in more fatalities across the globe than the better-understood effects of blast, prompt radiation, and fallout. Electromagnetic pulse effects, which could range from minor electrical disturbances to the complete collapse of the electric grid, are similarly highly uncertain. Nuclear war likelihood assessments are largely based on intuition, and they span the spectrum from zero to certainty. Notwithstanding these profound uncertainties, we must manage the risk of nuclear war with the knowledge we have. Benefit-cost analysis and other structured analytic methods applied to evaluate risk mitigation measures must acknowledge that we often do not even know whether many proposed approaches (e.g., reducing nuclear arsenals) will have a net positive or negative effect. Multidisciplinary studies are needed to better understand the consequences and likelihood of nuclear war and the complex relationship between these two components of risk, and to predict both the direction and magnitude of risk mitigation approaches.

scholarly journals Economic Analysis and Investment Priorities in Sweden’s Transport Sector

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Andersson ◽  
Lars Hultkrantz ◽  
Gunnar Lindberg ◽  
Jan-Eric Nilsson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Makers ◽  
Transport Infrastructure ◽  
Transport Sector ◽  
Main Concern ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
Construction Costs ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
National Road

Beginning as a planning tool within Sweden’s national road administration some 50 years ago, benefit-cost analysis (BCA) has come to be a pillar of the national transport policy because of subsequent strategic choices made by the national parliament. These choices made it necessary to widen the analysis of costs to include also externalities and a foregone conclusion was that efficient investment priorities should be made based on BCA. But no one asked whether the political decision makers or the BCA models were up to that task. This paper reviews the institutional framework and practice of BCA in Sweden for transport infrastructure investment, and considers design issues that have been and still are debated, such as whether the discount rate should include a risk term and how to account for the marginal cost of public funds. A main concern with BCA results is the underestimation of construction costs, making transport sector projects look better than they are. Several ex post analyses have established that a higher NPV ratio increases the probability of being included in the investment program proposal prepared by the agency. The requirement to let projects undergo BCA seems to make planners “trim” project proposals by trying to reduce investment costs without significantly reducing benefits. This relationship is weaker among profitable projects. Moreover, there is no correlation between rate of return and the probability of being included in the final program, which is established on political grounds.

Making the Case for NextGen Concepts—Using the FAA Benefit-Cost Analysis Methodology

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Lagu ◽  
Suzanne Akkoush ◽  
Annie Cheng ◽  
Bill Dunlay
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Analysis Methodology ◽  
Benefit Cost

Public Investment Criteria: Benefit-Cost Analysis for Planned Economic Growth by Stephen A. Marglin. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1967. pp.103. 22s. 6d.********** Investments for Capacity Expansion: Size, Location and Time-Phasing edited by Alan S. Manne. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1967. pp.239. 45s.Investments for Capacity Expansion: Size, Location and Time-Phasing edited by Alan S. Manne. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1967. pp.239. 45s.

1967 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 416-420
Author(s):  
Arthur MacEwan
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Public Investment ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Capacity Expansion ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Many ◽  
Benefit Cost

These books are numbers 4 and 5, respectively, in the series "Studies in the Economic Development of India". The two books are interesting complements to one another, both being concerned with the analysis of projects within national plan formulation. However, they treat different sorts of problems and do so on very different levels. Marglin's Public Investment Criteria is a short treatise on the problems of cost-benefit analysis in an Indian type economy, i.e., a mixed economy in which the government accepts a large planning responsibility. The book, which is wholely theoretical, explains the many criteria needed for evaluation of projects. The work is aimed at beginning students and government officials with some training in economics. It is a clear and interesting "introduction to the special branch of economics that concerns itself with systematic analysis of investment alternatives from the point of view of a government".

Benefit-Cost Analysis in Global Health

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa A. Robinson ◽  
James K. Hammitt
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost

Note on "Benefit-Cost Analysis: A Questionable Part of Environmental Decisioning"

1975 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-231
Author(s):  
Alan S. Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document