Ex Post Evaluation for Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) 2000-2006
Work Package C: Cost benefit analysis of selected environment projects
The present call for tenders covers the second work package (work package B) of the ex post evaluation of the Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA). The objective of the evaluation is to carry out ex post cost benefit analyses for 10 environment projects co-financed by the Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) and to learn from these analyses for the current and future programming periods.
General conclusions based on the ten Cost-Benefit Analyses:
- Many of the environment infrastructure projects were carried out to meet legal requirements.
- Legal complience in itself does not ensure positive impacts in economic welfare terms – in most cases this was achieved at costs that exceeded the benefits that could be monetised
- Achieving positive ENPV may be impossible on project level; especially where the main objective of projects were to meet regulatory requirements
- In the two cases with objectives other than compliance, the environmental focus was found to be relevant to the needs of the region
- Generally, the projects generated positive side effects in terms of environmental awareness and institutional learning
- Distributional effects are also important to be considered:
- many projects benefit low-income regions, indirectly paid by higher income regions; however
- CBA as a tool does not capture such distributional effects.
How to improve ex ante CBA:
- CBA thinking should apply to the selection of alternatives, prior to the final design of the project, and integrated into the decision process.
- Do the CBAs much earlier in the process. A solid CBA should precede the final technical design of the project, and examine individual components of projects.
- CBA to be related to the Master Plan context.
- Cost efficiency analysis could be considered for 'need to have' projects.
- Clearer distinction between the financial and the economic CBA.
Findings on ex post CBA:
- Timing matters: ex post analysis is too early right after project completion
- starting from individual components is the easiest way to identify the benefit elements
- concentrate on valorisation of the main benefit elements
- wider benefits are often important outcomes but which are difficult to quantify
- Final Report
- Executive Summary
- Water Supply to Zaragoza and the Ebro Corridor, Spain
- Intervention on Waste Water Management in the Ebro River Basin, Barcelona Water Sanitation 2000-2004
- Set of 5 Regional Waste Disposal Sites, Bulgaria
- Dublin Region Waste Water Treatment Scheme (Stage 5), Ireland
- Facilities for solid waste management and recycling, Greece
- Szeged Municipal Waste Water Treatment and Collection Project, Hungary
- Solid Waste Management in Madrid, 2001 – Group 2: Degasification and Biogas Production Unit, Valdemingómez Landfill Sealing and Landscape Recovery, Spain
- Expansion of the water distribution the City of Plzeň, Czech Republic
- Water Quality Improvement in Szczecin, Poland
- LIPOR - Municipal Solid Waste Integrated Management, Portugal
- Second Interim Report
- First Interim Report
- Inception Report
- Terms of Reference
- Project descriptions of 20
Last modified on: