scholarly journals Project GENESIS: An All-inclusive Model to Perform Cost-Benefit Analysis of Green Roofs and Walls

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 85
Author(s):  
Cristina Matos Silva ◽  
Carlos Oliveira Cruz ◽  
Inês Teotónio
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Green Roofs ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Sustainable Urban Development ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Uncertainty Model ◽  
Life Cycle Perspective ◽  
Alternative Solutions

Green roofs and walls are one of the most promising alternatives for retrofitting existing built environments and tackle urban challenges in a multifunctional way. Yet, these solutions are being confined to specific countries or cities, as their economic contribution has not been fully examined nor accepted. GENESIS is a trans-disciplinary project funded by FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia that will develop a systematic and comprehensive model to support potential investors or decision-makers, balancing the costs with the benefits of green roofs and walls in a life cycle perspective. The main objective of the project is to enhance existing cost-benefit analysis of green roofs and walls through a multidisciplinary approach that will allow the replication in different regions and type of infrastructures. This will be achieved by: i) monetizing and including all economic, social and environmental benefits in the analysis in order to weight different types of benefits (even those that are typically difficult to estimate because they have no market value) and establish a comparative basis of alternative solutions and potential scenarios; ii) comprising an uncertainty model to cope with climate change and inaccurate forecasting of benefits/costs modelling and; iii) including multi-criteria mode in order to incorporate users and investors preferences. This all-inclusive model crucial for a wide spreading in is green roofs and walls and a more sustainable development in cities. Keywords: green roofs/walls; cost-benefit analysis; investors/users preferences; sustainable urban development; uncertainty

Inclusion of Social Subsystem Issues in IT Investment Decisions

2011 ◽  
pp. 164-183
Author(s):  
Sherry D. Ryan ◽  
Michael S. Gates
Keyword(s):  
Survey Data ◽  
Decision Process ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Investment Decisions ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Decision Criteria ◽  
The Social

Researchers have attempted to augment the traditional cost/benefit analysis model used in the IT decision process. However, frequently social subsystem issues are inadequately considered. Survey data, collected from a U.S. sample of 200 executives, provides an empirical assessment of how these issues compare with other IT decision criteria given differing decision types. The social subsystem issues considered most important by decision makers are also identified and the manner by which they consider these issues is investigated.

Cost/Benefit Analysis

1973 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-322
Author(s):  
John E. Tropman ◽  
Karl H. Gohlke
Keyword(s):  
Information System ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Organizational Goals ◽  
Style Of Thought

The techniques of cost/benefit analysis are presented in a general way in order to encourage decision-makers in the crim inal justice system to adopt a style of thought that will assist them in formulating decisional alternatives. Discussion of the promises and pitfalls of the technique addresses the question of whether the "benefits" of cost/benefit analysis are sufficient to outweigh the "costs" in its adoption. The authors contend that the technique can be quite useful to executives in their quest to manage their organizations toward the achievement of organizational goals because the technique will enable them to identify new programs worthy of experimentation, will encour age the development of an accurate information system, will en hance their ability to base programatic decisions on community and social indicatcrs, and will better equip them in their rela tionships with legislators, funding bodies, and interest groups.

scholarly journals How much is a public park worth? An ex ante methodology for impact and cost-benefit analysis on the example of Millenáris Széllkapu in Budapest

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 7-21
Author(s):  
Vera Iváncsics ◽  
Zsolt Szendrei ◽  
József Obertik ◽  
Gábor Balás
Keyword(s):  
Urban Landscape ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Public Parks ◽  
Hedonic Price ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Public Park ◽  
Ex Ante ◽  
Investment Returns

Establishing a public park raises a number of methodological issues. The model worked out by HÉTFA Research Institute is suitable for cost-benefit analysis and ex ante viability test of a public park integrated into urban landscape. The paper presents the model by the example of a planned public park at one of the busiest centers of Budapest, the junction of Margit Boulevard and Millennium Park. Such a comprehensive economic evaluation for public parks has not been made in Hungary. First the mechanism of effects was set up, and by using the hedonic price method the project’s costs and benefits were presented with national and international statistical indicators and benchmarks. The investment, that has been started in 2016 with in the initial planning and demolition pays for itself by 2019. The results are tested with sensitivity analysis, which has inter alia shown that if we count by the general approach of the project management - costs are expected to increase by 10% and benefits are to reduce by 10% - investment returns for the city and their inhabitants for 2030. Furthermore, without the effect of property appreciation - the investment turns positive by 2061 thanks only to indirect social, economic, environmental benefits. According to our analysis, the park's development, which relaxes a built-in highly populated urban fabric, has become an economically profitable investment as a result of significant beneficial external effects.

Robotic radiosurgery for the treatment of one to three brain metastases: A pragmatic application of cost-benefit analysis using willingness to pay.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 17-17
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Noah Greenspoon ◽  
Waseem Sharieff ◽  
Anthony Whitton ◽  
Timothy Joseph Whelan ◽  
Jim R. Wright ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Robotic Radiosurgery ◽  
Starting Point

17 Background: With the emergence of radiosurgery as a new radiotheraputic technique, health care decision makers are required to incorporate community need, cost and patient preferences when allocating radiosurgery resources. Conventional patient utility measures would not reflect short term preferences and would therefore not inform decision makers when allocating radiosurgery treatment units. The goal of this article is to demonstrate the feasibility of cost-benefit analysis to elicit the yearly net monetary benefit of robotic radiosurgery. Methods: To calculate the yearly incremental cost of robotic radiosurgery as compared to fixed-gantry radiosurgery we used direct local cost data. We assumed a standard 10 year replacement and 5% amortization rate. Decision boards summarizing the clinical scenario of brain metastases and the difference between robotic and fixed-gantry radiosurgery in terms of immobilization, comfort and treatment time were then presented to a sample of 18 participants. Participants who preferred robotic radiosurgery were randomly assigned to either a low ($1) or high ($5) starting point taxation based willingness-to-pay algorithm. Results: The yearly incremental cost of providing robotic radiosurgery was $99,177. The mean community yearly willingness-to pay for robotic radiosurgery was $2,300,000, p=0.03. The calculated yearly net societal benefit for robotic radiosurgery was $2,200,823. Among participants who preferred robotic radiosurgery there was no evidence of starting point bias, p=0.8. Conclusions: We have shown through this pilot study that it is feasible to perform cost-benefit analysis to evaluate new technologies in Radiation Oncology. Cost-benefit analysis offers an analytic method to evaluate local preferences and provide accountability when allocating limited healthcare resources.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document