Why Cost Benefit Analysis is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans: A process perspective

Why Cost Benefit Analysis is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans: A process perspective. Beukers, E., Bertolini, L., & Te Brömmelstroet, M. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(1):68--78, January, 2012.

Paper doi abstract bibtex

Academic discussions on Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an appraisal instrument for integrated land use and transportation plans tend to focus on its technical aspects. However, many issues of CBA also arise from process related matters, especially when assessing integrated plans. Using an inductive research design, we explored how these process related issues play out in Dutch planning practices. In two applied research techniques, focus group sessions and open in depth interviews, we focused on process related issues as perceived by CBA participants ranging from plan makers to CBA testers. This article presents the different perceptions of issues in CBA processes. Through these collected perspectives, we found that these issues are multi-layered and present a number of fundamental dilemmas. After relating our empirical data to theory, we conclude that the biggest challenge lies in decreasing the level of mistrust and communication deficits revealed between plan owners and CBA calculators and their respective frames of thinking when assessing complex integrated land use and transportation plans.

@article{beukers_why_2012,
	title = {Why {Cost} {Benefit} {Analysis} is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans: {A} process perspective},
	volume = {46},
	issn = {0965-8564},
	shorttitle = {Why {Cost} {Benefit} {Analysis} is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans},
	url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856411001376},
	doi = {10.1016/j.tra.2011.09.004},
	abstract = {Academic discussions on Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an appraisal instrument for integrated land use and transportation plans tend to focus on its technical aspects. However, many issues of CBA also arise from process related matters, especially when assessing integrated plans. Using an inductive research design, we explored how these process related issues play out in Dutch planning practices. In two applied research techniques, focus group sessions and open in depth interviews, we focused on process related issues as perceived by CBA participants ranging from plan makers to CBA testers. This article presents the different perceptions of issues in CBA processes. Through these collected perspectives, we found that these issues are multi-layered and present a number of fundamental dilemmas. After relating our empirical data to theory, we conclude that the biggest challenge lies in decreasing the level of mistrust and communication deficits revealed between plan owners and CBA calculators and their respective frames of thinking when assessing complex integrated land use and transportation plans.},
	number = {1},
	urldate = {2011-11-01},
	journal = {Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice},
	author = {Beukers, Els and Bertolini, Luca and Te Brömmelstroet, Marco},
	month = jan,
	year = {2012},
	keywords = {Assessing integrated land use and transportation plans, CBA process issues, Participant perceptions},
	pages = {68--78},
	file = {science23r.pdf:files/34652/science23r.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34635/S0965856411001376.html:text/html;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34640/S0965856411001376.html:text/html}
}

Downloads: 0

{"_id":"JffSLLXwSF7m2e8Ls","bibbaseid":"beukers-bertolini-tebrmmelstroet-whycostbenefitanalysisisperceivedasaproblematictoolforassessmentoftransportplansaprocessperspective-2012","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-09-09T06:27:28.340Z","title":"Why Cost Benefit Analysis is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans: A process perspective","author_short":["Beukers, E.","Bertolini, L.","Te Brömmelstroet, M."],"year":2012,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://www.sfu.ca/~howlett/howlett16.bib","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Why Cost Benefit Analysis is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans: A process perspective","volume":"46","issn":"0965-8564","shorttitle":"Why Cost Benefit Analysis is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans","url":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856411001376","doi":"10.1016/j.tra.2011.09.004","abstract":"Academic discussions on Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an appraisal instrument for integrated land use and transportation plans tend to focus on its technical aspects. However, many issues of CBA also arise from process related matters, especially when assessing integrated plans. Using an inductive research design, we explored how these process related issues play out in Dutch planning practices. In two applied research techniques, focus group sessions and open in depth interviews, we focused on process related issues as perceived by CBA participants ranging from plan makers to CBA testers. This article presents the different perceptions of issues in CBA processes. Through these collected perspectives, we found that these issues are multi-layered and present a number of fundamental dilemmas. After relating our empirical data to theory, we conclude that the biggest challenge lies in decreasing the level of mistrust and communication deficits revealed between plan owners and CBA calculators and their respective frames of thinking when assessing complex integrated land use and transportation plans.","number":"1","urldate":"2011-11-01","journal":"Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Beukers"],"firstnames":["Els"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Bertolini"],"firstnames":["Luca"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Te","Brömmelstroet"],"firstnames":["Marco"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"January","year":"2012","keywords":"Assessing integrated land use and transportation plans, CBA process issues, Participant perceptions","pages":"68--78","file":"science23r.pdf:files/34652/science23r.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34635/S0965856411001376.html:text/html;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34640/S0965856411001376.html:text/html","bibtex":"@article{beukers_why_2012,\n\ttitle = {Why {Cost} {Benefit} {Analysis} is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans: {A} process perspective},\n\tvolume = {46},\n\tissn = {0965-8564},\n\tshorttitle = {Why {Cost} {Benefit} {Analysis} is perceived as a problematic tool for assessment of transport plans},\n\turl = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856411001376},\n\tdoi = {10.1016/j.tra.2011.09.004},\n\tabstract = {Academic discussions on Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an appraisal instrument for integrated land use and transportation plans tend to focus on its technical aspects. However, many issues of CBA also arise from process related matters, especially when assessing integrated plans. Using an inductive research design, we explored how these process related issues play out in Dutch planning practices. In two applied research techniques, focus group sessions and open in depth interviews, we focused on process related issues as perceived by CBA participants ranging from plan makers to CBA testers. This article presents the different perceptions of issues in CBA processes. Through these collected perspectives, we found that these issues are multi-layered and present a number of fundamental dilemmas. After relating our empirical data to theory, we conclude that the biggest challenge lies in decreasing the level of mistrust and communication deficits revealed between plan owners and CBA calculators and their respective frames of thinking when assessing complex integrated land use and transportation plans.},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\turldate = {2011-11-01},\n\tjournal = {Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice},\n\tauthor = {Beukers, Els and Bertolini, Luca and Te Brömmelstroet, Marco},\n\tmonth = jan,\n\tyear = {2012},\n\tkeywords = {Assessing integrated land use and transportation plans, CBA process issues, Participant perceptions},\n\tpages = {68--78},\n\tfile = {science23r.pdf:files/34652/science23r.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34635/S0965856411001376.html:text/html;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34640/S0965856411001376.html:text/html}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Beukers, E.","Bertolini, L.","Te Brömmelstroet, M."],"key":"beukers_why_2012","id":"beukers_why_2012","bibbaseid":"beukers-bertolini-tebrmmelstroet-whycostbenefitanalysisisperceivedasaproblematictoolforassessmentoftransportplansaprocessperspective-2012","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856411001376"},"keyword":["Assessing integrated land use and transportation plans","CBA process issues","Participant perceptions"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["cost","benefit","analysis","perceived","problematic","tool","assessment","transport","plans","process","perspective","beukers","bertolini","te brömmelstroet"],"keywords":["assessing integrated land use and transportation plans","cba process issues","participant perceptions"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["Bn7xRaKMY43f7hFwh"]}