Abstract

In this paper we describe how we included travel time variability in the national Dutch transport forecasting model and what the policy impacts of this new forecasting tool are. Until now, travel time reliability improvements for road projects were included in Dutch cost-benefit analysis (CBA) by multiplying the travel time benefits from reduced congestion by a factor 1.25. This proportionality is based on the linkage between congestion reduction and reliability improvements. However, this treatment of reliability is not useful to evaluate policies that especially affect travel time variability. From the start, this method was provisional and meant to be replaced by a better method capturing travel time variability. For this, we derived an empirical relation between the standard deviation of travel time, mean delay of travel time and length of route. This has been implemented in the national Dutch model as a post processing module. The new travel time reliability forecasting model will be incorporated in the Dutch guidelines for CBA. Document type: Part of book or chapter of book

Abstract

This paper presents a methodology to identify key priority areas for transport investments. The methodology uses a geospatial data-driven approach and then proposes an innovative economic analysis for project appraisal. The two main steps involve (i) prioritization of road interventions based on a set of economic, social, and risk reduction criteria; and (ii) assessment of monetized and nonmonetized costs and benefits of road interventions under many scenarios covering the uncertainty on future risks and other factors. This methodology is used at different stages of project preparation for a rural roads lending operation to the Government of Mozambique. In the two regions of Mozambique considered, the analysis prioritizes regions along the coast when combining agriculture, fisheries, poverty, network criticality, and hazard risk criteria. With a limited budget of US$15 million per district, the results show that investing in repairing and rehabilitating culverts and bridges is the intervention that performs better under most of the scenarios. Document type: Book

Abstract

Governments worldwide face the difficult challenge of deciding which infrastructure projects to prioritize and select for implementation, given the limits of available funding and the need to attain their developmental goals. The key objective of this report is to conduct a comparative exercise between the World Bank's Infrastructure Prioritization Framework, a multicriteria analysis–based methodology to project prioritization, and a more complex cost-benefit analysis–based approach. The report focuses on Chile, which has a well-institutionalized evaluation process that uses cost-benefit analysis to assess projects on their quality and ability to generate value for money. The analysis compares the results of the Infrastructure Prioritization Framework alongside Chile's current cost-benefit analysis–based and multicriteria analysis approaches to the same subsets of projects in the road transport and water reservoir subsectors, respectively. The results show that the Infrastructure Prioritization Framework has application beyond its original proposition and can complement a traditional cost-benefit analysis by directly considering social and environmental policy goals that are otherwise difficult to quantify in a cost-benefit analysis. The analysis also finds that in Chile there is a discrepancy between the stated goals and objectives of the appraisal system and the actual implementation. In the case of transport sector projects, there is an evident deviation between cost-benefit analysis–based selection policy and actual decisions made for project implementation. In the case of water catchment selection, there is a bias toward projects with higher financial-economic performance as compared to social-environmental performance, despite policy intentions to afford consideration to environmental and social development goals. Document type: Book

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide feedback on the question of socioeconomic benefits from rural road development and the impact of transport infrastructure on the poor, particularly the poorest and the bottom 20 percent of the population. This paper relies on impact evaluation methodologies, which are traditionally used in social sectors but less so in the transport sector. The study, including first surveys, was launched in 2003 under the Tocantins Sustainable Regional Development Project. The paper highlights the context that led to the project’s design, which included an impact evaluation of the works envisaged under the project. The paper also highlights some of the main challenges faced by this impact evaluation and how these challenges were addressed for the present study. It then provides details about the data collected during the surveys and the key relevant characteristics of the population targeted by the surveys. It discusses the possible estimation methods envisioned to undertake the study and provides the main results of the assessment based on these methods. The analysis shows that improved rural roads changed people’s transport modal choice. People used more public buses and individual motorized vehicles after the rural road improvements. The paper also finds that the project increased school attendance, particularly for girls. Although the evidence is relatively weak in statistical terms, it indicates that the project contributed to increasing agricultural jobs and household income in certain regions. Document type: Book