scholarly journals Spatial cost‐benefit analysis of blue restoration and factors driving net benefits globally

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phoebe Stewart‐Sinclair ◽  
Carissa Klein ◽  
Ian J Bateman ◽  
Catherine E. Lovelock
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Net Benefits

Risk in Public Sector Project Appraisal: It Mostly Does Not Matter!

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Moore ◽  
Anthony E. Boardman ◽  
Aidan R. Vining
Keyword(s):  
Risk Premium ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Public Project ◽  
Aggregate Consumption ◽  
Project Appraisal ◽  
Expected Values ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
Special Circumstances

Public project appraisal using cost-benefit analysis (CBA) requires analysts to project risky net benefits and to convert these into present values using a social discount rate (SDR). We consider which types of risk matter for CBA. For small projects with only idiosyncratic risks, expected net benefits should be discounted at a risk-free SDR. If projects are large or expected net benefits are correlated with aggregate consumption, the alternatives are to replace expected net benefits with their certainty equivalents (CEs) and to discount these at a risk-free SDR, or to discount expected net benefits using a higher SDR that includes a risk premium. These methods are equivalent under special circumstances that are unlikely; the first approach is the correct one. We examine when replacing expected values with CEs will matter, and how this might be done. For most projects, analysts should discount expected values of net benefits at a risk-free SDR.

scholarly journals Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Children's Spectacle Reimbursement Scheme: Evidence for Including Children's Spectacles in Mongolia's Social Health Insurance

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ai Chee Yong ◽  
Chimgee Chuluunkhuu ◽  
Ving Fai Chan ◽  
Tai Stephan ◽  
Nathan Congdon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Insurance ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Social Health Insurance ◽  
Vision Impairment ◽  
Social Health ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Rural And Urban ◽  
Reimbursement Scheme ◽  
Net Benefits

Background and aim: Globally, 12.8 million children have vision impairment due to uncorrected refractive error (URE). In Mongolia, one in five children needs but do not have access to spectacles. This cost-benefit analysis aims to estimate the net benefits of a children's spectacles reimbursement scheme in Mongolia. Methods: A willingness-to-pay (WTP) survey using the contingent valuation method was administered to rural and urban Mongolia respondents. The survey assessed WTP in additional annual taxes for any child with refractive error to be provided government-subsidised spectacles. Net benefits were then calculated based on mean WTP (i.e. benefit) and cost of spectacles. Results: The survey recruited 50 respondents (mean age 40.2 +/- 9.86 years; 78.0% women; 100% response rate) from rural and urban Mongolia. Mean WTP was US$24.00 +/- 5.15 (95% CI US$22.55 to 25.35). The average cost of a pair of spectacles in Mongolia is US$15.00. Subtracting the average cost of spectacles from mean WTP yielded a mean positive net benefit of US$9.00. Conclusion: A spectacle reimbursement scheme is a potentially cost-effective intervention to address childhood vision impairment due to URE in Mongolia. These preliminary findings support the inclusion of children's spectacles into existing Social Health Insurance. A much larger random sample could be employed in future research to increase the precision and generalisability of findings.

scholarly journals Análisis coste-beneficio de las estructuras inteligentes = Cost-benefit analysis of intelligent structures

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Felix Ruiz Gorrindo ◽  
Pau Martí Colom ◽  
Ariadna Llorens Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Fiber Optic ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Payback Period ◽  
Smart Structure ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Intelligent Structures ◽  
Initial Cost ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
The One

Resumen Definimos estructura inteligente como aquella estructura dotada de unos sensores (en especial continuos y de fibra óptica), de manera que es capaz de transmitir datos de interés sobre su estado de salud (deformaciones, fisuraciones, oxidaciones, etc.). Esta tecnología puede facilitar el mantenimiento preventivo de los edificios y la gestión de su salud estructural. Por ello, un aspecto de interés necesario a analizar para saber si la tecnología es aplicable o no, es evaluar su rentabilidad. Así, el objeto de este artículo es realizar un análisis coste-beneficio de las estructuras inteligentes, estudiando por un lado cuál es el incremento de coste inicial que supone la implementación de la propuesta, y por otro lado evaluar cuál es el ahorro de dinero a lo largo del tiempo que supone la aplicación de la misma, lo que permite establecer el periodo de retorno de la inversión inicial, y a partir de qué momento se pueden esperar beneficios netos. Abstract Smart structure is defined as that structure equipped with sensors (especially continuous and composed of fiber optic), so that it is capable of transmitting data of interest about its state of health (deformations, cracks, oxidations, etc.). This technology can facilitate the preventive maintenance of buildings and the management of their structural health. Therefore, an aspect of interest necessary to analyze in order to know if the technology is applicable or not, is to evaluate its profitability. Thus, the objective of this article is to perform a cost-benefit analysis of smart structures, studying on the one hand which is the initial cost increase involved in the implementation of the proposal, and on the other hand to evaluate which is the saving of money to over the time that the application of it represents, what allows to establish the payback period of the initial investment, and from which moment you can expect net benefits.

scholarly journals Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
Lauren Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The Other ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Construction Costs ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
Years Of Service

This cost-benefit analysis studies several significant costs and benefits of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project. The two major costs of construction and operating expenses and the two major benefits of passenger benefits and car miles saved have been used to analyze the project over a 30-year period starting in 2009, to include four years of construction followed by 26 years of Metro operation. The project was determined to have a net cost of $1.78 billion. With the exception of the first four years, in which construction costs would be incurred but the other three costs and benefits would not yet be realized, the project creates annual benefits of $32 million or greater. Additionally, a break-even analysis was performed within the sensitivity analysis to determine the year in which net benefits would begin accruing on the project. This year was found to be 2063, or 54 years into the project (including four years of construction and 50 years of service). Any following years in which the Metrorail was still operating would create increasing net benefits.

scholarly journals A cost-benefit analysis of Tulsa’s IDA program

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Greenberg
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Individual Development ◽  
Random Assignment ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Benefits And Costs ◽  
Observation Period

This article presents findings from a cost-benefit analysis of the Tulsa Individual Development Account (IDA) program, a demonstration program that was initiated in the late 1990s and is being evaluated through random assignment. The program put particular emphasis on using savings subsidies to help participants accumulate housing assets. The key follow-up data used in the evaluation was collected around 10 years after random assignment, about 6 years after the program ended. The results imply that, during this 10-year observation period, program participants gained from the program and that the program resulted in net costs to the government and private donors, and that society as a whole was probably worse off as a consequence of the program. The article examines in some detail whether these findings are robust to a number of different considerations, including the assumptions upon which the results depend, uncertainly reflected by the standard errors of the impact estimates used to derive the benefits and costs, and omitted benefits and costs, and concludes that they are essentially robust. For example, a Monte Carlo analysis suggests that the probability that the societal net benefits of the Tulsa program were negative during the observation period is over 90% and that the probability that the loss to society exceeded $1000 is 80%. Further analysis considered benefits and costs that might occur beyond the observation period. Based on this analysis, it appeared plausible, although far from certain, that the societal net benefits of the Tulsa program could eventually become positive. This would occur if the program’s apparent positive net impact on educational attainment generates substantial positive effects on the earnings of program participants after the observation period ended. However, there was no evidence that the educational impacts had yet begun to produce positive effects on earnings by the end of the observation period.

scholarly journals A Review of the Regulatory Impact Analysis of Risk-Based Capital and Related Liquidity Rules

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 24
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Hogan
Keyword(s):  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Quantitative Evidence ◽  
Regulatory Impact Analysis ◽  
Regulatory Impact ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
The Cost

This paper reviews the cost-benefit analysis, or “regulatory impact analysis” (RIA), in US bank regulators’ risk-based capital (RBC) rule proposals. We review the principles of cost-benefit analysis and its application by US bank regulators. We provide a brief background on RBC rules and review the literature on their costs and benefits. We then evaluate 27 proposed RBC rules and related rules on bank liquidity. We find that nine of the 27 rules include RIAs. Five of the RIAs claim the proposed rule will create net benefits, but none provide quantitative evidence that the benefits exceed the costs. In two proposals, the evidence cited indicates the rules’ net benefits may actually be negative.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document