Die Ökonomie der Flüchtlingskrise

2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-14
Author(s):  
Leef Dierks
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Economic Cost ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
The Political ◽  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
Political Dimension ◽  
Hartz Iv

Im vergangenen Jahr kamen weit mehr als 1,1 Mio. Flüchtlinge nach Deutschland. Unstrittig ist, dass diese historisch beispielslose Zuwanderung immense volkswirtschaftliche Kosten von bis zu 55 Mrd. € im Jahre 2022 verursachen wird. Doch in dem Maße, in dem mittelfristig eine Integration der Migranten in den Arbeitsmarkt gelingt, kann mit dieser Entwicklung auch ein erheblicher volkswirtschaftlicher Nutzen einhergehen. Ungeachtet der politischen Dimension der anhaltenden Zuwanderung vermittelt dieser Beitrag eine Einschätzung der Auswirkungen auf die öffentlichen Haushalte. Als problematisch erweist sich dabei insbesondere die eingeschränkte Belastbarkeit bisher vorliegender Daten. Zudem sei darauf verwiesen, dass die sogenannte Flüchtlingskrise sich per se jeglicher Wirtschaftlichkeitsrechnung entzieht. Es handelt sich zunächst um eine humanitäre Herausforderung. Diese ist nur sehr eingeschränkt für eine Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse geeignet. In 2015, more than 1.1m refugees sought shelter in Germany. It is undisputed that this historically unprecedented immigration will incur immense costs; potentially as much €55bn in 2022. To the extent to which migrants can be successfully integrated into the labour market in the medium term, however, economic benefits could materialise. Notwithstanding the political dimension of the ongoing immigration, this contribution assesses the overall impact on public finances. The lack of reliable data proves to be challenging. Further, the refugee crisis first and foremost is a humanitarian challenge. This inevitably raises the question whether the issue is well suited for an economic cost-benefit-analysis. Keywords: zuwanderung, staatshaushalt, migration, hartz iv, fiskalische kosten

Age 21 Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers

2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur J. Reynolds ◽  
Judy A. Temple ◽  
Dylan L. Robertson ◽  
Emily A. Mann
Keyword(s):  
Title I ◽  
Remedial Education ◽  
Program Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
School Age ◽  
Program Participation ◽  
Benefit Analysis

We conducted the first cost-benefit analysis of a federally financed, comprehensive early childhood program. The Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers are located in public schools and provide educational and family support services to low-income children from ages 3 to 9. Using data from a cohort of 1,539 program and comparison-group children born in 1980 who participate in the Chicago Longitudinal Study, measures of program participation were significantly associated with greater school achievement, higher rates of high school completion, and with significantly lower rates of remedial education services, juvenile delinquency, and child maltreatment. Economic analyses indicated that the measured and projected economic benefits of preschool participation, school-age participation, and extended program participation exceeded costs. In present-value 1998 dollars, the preschool program provided a return to society of $7.14 per dollar invested by increasing economic well-being and tax revenues, and by reducing public expenditures for remedial education, criminal justice treatment, and crime victims. The extended intervention program (4 to 6 years of participation) provided a return to society of $6.11 per dollar invested while the school-age program yielded a return of $1.66 per dollar invested. Findings demonstrate that an established public program can provide benefits that far exceed costs. Key elements of CPC program effectiveness include an instructional focus on literacy, opportunities for intensive parent involvement, and implementation by well-trained staff within a single administrative system.

Economic cost benefit analysis of climate change adaptation for infrastructure

2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 687
Author(s):  
Michael Nolan
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Water Supply ◽  
Climate Adaptation ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Economic Cost ◽  
Economic Modelling ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Lessons Learnt

This paper explores the lessons learnt from the Optimising Adaptation Investment projects for the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency–it includes coastal settlements, water supply and rail infrastructure case studies. These projects are the first of their kind in Australia and are considered internationally as a leading example of economic cost benefit analysis. They have been used effectively to inform decision making on specific adaptation responses to climate change risks to existing and new infrastructure. The lessons learnt will be explored for offshore platforms, ports, rail, road, drainage, tailings dams, mine facilities, water, and power supply, which includes the following elements: What decision makers require to make informed decisions under the uncertainty of climate change impacts. Reducing the uncertainty through economic modelling and cost benefit analysis. Optimising the right timing and scale of various adaptation options. Benefiting from oil and gas infrastructure adaptation opportunities. To further support the elements above, the applied process for integrating climate adaptation into infrastructure planning, design and operation will be illustrated by AECOM project experiences. AECOM has completed more than 60 significant climate change risk and adaptation projects for mines, ports, water supply and treatment, energy generation, transmission and distribution, rail, road, and coastal settlements in Australia, including the report: Climate Change Impacts to Infrastructure in Australia for the Garnaut Climate Change Review.

The Principles and Objectives of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

1968 ◽  
Vol 72 (685) ◽  
pp. 43-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Stratton
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
The Political ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Value For Money ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
National Newspaper ◽  
Is Value

The terms “cost-effectiveness” and to a lesser degree “cost-benefit” analysis have become familiar words in the technical and national press, the former usually in relation to defence projects—the latter in relation to social projects, such as transport, power generation and building. Indeed, at the time of the last General Election the political correspondent of a national newspaper wrote, “Mr. Heath and Mr. Callaghan, Chancellor of the Exchequer, vied with each other in stressing the importance of cost-effectiveness, which used to be known as getting value for money”. The apparently simple concept of “value for money” raises three important issues: (i) how is “value” of defence and social projects quantified? (ii) what is the “money” involved, i.e. what are all the relevant costs? and (iii) what are the information and decision processes that are used in attempting to obtain “value for money“?

Economic cost–benefit analysis of the addictive digital game industry

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 638-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong J. Cho ◽  
Hyung T. Kim ◽  
Jaywon Lee ◽  
Sang H. Park
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Economic Cost ◽  
Digital Game ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Game Industry

scholarly journals Application and importance of cost-benefit analysis in energy efficiency projects implemented in public buildings: The case of Serbia

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 915-929 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Mihic ◽  
Dejan Petrovic ◽  
Aleksandar Vuckovic ◽  
Vladimir Obradovic ◽  
Dejan Djurovic
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Financial Resources ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Public Buildings ◽  
Practical Test ◽  
Effectiveness And Efficiency

The main objective of this paper is to present the advantages of using Cost-Benefit analysis in energy efficiency projects implemented in public buildings, and to prove the hypothesis that Cost-Benefit analysis boosts the effectiveness and efficiency of the said type of projects. The paper offers theoretical and practical explanation of the implementation of Cost-Benefit analysis in the relevant area. Since energy efficiency projects in public buildings usually represent a part of a broader portfolio of similar projects and their implementation demands allocation of substantial financial resources, communities are often be interested in achieving maximal economic and non-economic benefits. This paper aims to demonstrate that Cost-Benefit analysis can represent an excellent contribution when attempting to select the projects for implementation within a broader portfolio of energy efficiency projects in public buildings. This hypothesis was demonstrated by putting a greater emphasis on non-economic benefits and the costs arising from implementation of the aforementioned types of projects. In addition, a practical test of this hypothesis was performed through the implementation of an energy efficiency portfolio in public buildings, worth several tens of millions of dollars - the Serbian Energy Efficiency Project. The paper concludes that the use of Cost-Benefit analysis can help us to effectively evaluate and manage projects of this type aimed at achieving maximum benefits for the community in question.

scholarly journals L’industrie de l’amiante

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-284
Author(s):  
Roma Dauphin
Keyword(s):  
Multinational Firms ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Asbestos Fiber ◽  
The Political ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Fiber Production ◽  
Asbestos Fibers ◽  
Political Forces ◽  
The Government

This study is comprised of two parts. The first is essentially descriptive and seeks to define with greater precision the nature of the Western world's asbestos fiber needs, account being made currently-known technology and the existence of substitutes. Asbestos ore reserves are then examined with a view to evaluating the constraints conditioning current asbestos fiber production. With the exception of that carried out in the U.S.S.R., this production is highly concentrated in Quebec whose surplus output is exported to every continent at prices that have experienced a staggering increase since 1973 even though international trade in asbestos fibers is conducted via multinational firms. The second part of the study contains a cost-benefit analysis of Quebec's new policy as well as a brief consideration of the political forces that have induced the Government of Quebec to adopt it.

scholarly journals Can we improve academic performance and student satisfaction without additional time cost for teachers? Evidence from a blended methodology in Microeconomics

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
Anett Erdmann ◽  
Alfonso Jesús Torres Marín
Keyword(s):  
Student Satisfaction ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Study Time ◽  
Time Cost ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Additional Time ◽  
Learning Platform ◽  
The Impact

<p><strong>Purpose</strong>: The main goal of this paper is to determine if the use of a blended methodology can improve performance and satisfaction of the students, with no additional time cost for teachers. As a second objective, the article attempts to explain observed differences across students in the effect of the methodology on study time based on the theory of optimal decision making. Finally, we sketch a simple cost benefit analysis for the digital learning platform (DLP) used.</p><p><strong>Design</strong>: The teachers combined the traditional classes methodology with the adoption of a DLP in two courses of Microeconomics at an undergraduate level at ESIC Business &amp; Marketing School. Subsequently it is analyzed the impact of this methodology on student satisfaction and performance, as well as on student’s study time using different analytical tools.</p><p><strong>Findings:</strong>  students’ grades, at the final exam, increased in a significative way as they spent more time with the DLP and/or when they do more digital assignments at home. Their satisfaction with the blended methodology, and the use of the DLP was quite high for most of students. Their feedback on working time relative to traditional methods showed two extremes, either studying much more or much less. We provide a theoretical explanation for this observation, based on Microeconomic theory.  A cost-benefit analysis of the DLP tool at an institutional level suggests that its economic costs are more than justified by the economic benefits of the tool in terms of student’s satisfaction, brand reputation and teachers time saving.</p><p><strong>Contribution:</strong> This document provides a methodology to measure the benefits of an innovative learning methodology using relevant indicators and employing advanced statistical techniques as regression analysis. It also helps us to understand student’s behavior in the face of an educational innovation based on technology. The findings are in line with economic theory.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document