Infrastructure construction and use is at the heart o the current political debate. Not only are European member state governments investing large amounts of money to alleviate the harmful effects of the economic downturn due to the credit crisis, EU accession countries receive large amounts of cohesion funds for infrastructure purposes. Infrastructure is widely believed to contribute largely to economic performance, but to what extent is this the case? How does the productivity of roads, railways and ports relate to the invested money, and what determines their effectiveness?
In this Brief, which focuses to a large extent on Dutch and European practice, numerous distinguished economists describe policy practice and analytical tools for infrastructure appraisal. Moreover, harmonisation of European approaches for evaluation of infrastructure are discussed. The study focuses both on scientific productivity measurement as on case studies of infrastructure policy.
Inhaltsverzeichnis
1;Infrastructure ProductivityEvaluation;3 1.1;Contents;5 1.2;Contributors;7 1.3;Chapter 1: Introduction;9 1.3.1;1.1 Infrastructure: What Does the Rear-View Mirror Tell Us About the Way Forward?;9 1.4;Chapter 2: The Productivity of Public Capital: A Meta-analysis;13 1.4.1;2.1 Introduction;13 1.4.2;2.2 Public Capital and Private Output;16 1.4.2.1;2.2.1 Definitions;16 1.4.2.2;2.2.2 Methodologies Employed in the Literature;16 1.4.2.2.1;2.2.2.1 Four Methodological Approaches;17 1.4.2.2.2;2.2.2.2 The Production Function Approach;17 1.4.2.3;2.2.3 Stylized Facts;19 1.4.2.4;2.2.4 Criticisms of the Production Function Approach;21 1.4.3;2.3 A Simple Meta-analysis;22 1.4.3.1;2.3.1 The Meta-sample;23 1.4.3.2;2.3.2 Results of the Meta-analysis;27 1.4.4;2.4 Meta-regression Analysis;29 1.4.4.1;2.4.1 Hypotheses;29 1.4.4.2;2.4.2 Meta-regression Model;31 1.4.4.2.1;2.4.2.1 Methodology;31 1.4.4.2.2;2.4.2.2 Data;31 1.4.5;2.5 Results;32 1.4.6;2.6 Conclusions;36 1.4.7;References;37 1.5;Chapter 3: The Effectiveness of Regional Policy: A Literature Study;41 1.5.1;3.1 Introduction;41 1.5.1.1;3.1.1 Scope;42 1.5.2;3.2 Approach;42 1.5.2.1;3.2.1 Research Quality;43 1.5.3;3.3 Results;43 1.5.3.1;3.3.1 Research Methods;44 1.5.4;3.4 Recent Developments;46 1.5.5;3.5 Conclusions;46 1.5.6;3.6 Recommendations;47 1.5.7;References;52 1.6;Chapter 4: Ex Post Evaluation of Rotterdam Port Investment;55 1.6.1;4.1 Introduction;55 1.6.2;4.2 Ex Post Evaluation of Infrastructure Projects: Too Little, Too Late?;56 1.6.3;4.3 Three Criteria for Ex Post Evaluation;58 1.6.4;4.4 Maasvlakte 1 in Historical Perspective;58 1.6.4.1;4.4.1 Port Policy After 1970;62 1.6.5;4.5 Ex Post Analysis 19682002;65 1.6.5.1;4.5.1 Costs;65 1.6.5.2;4.5.2 Benefits;67 1.6.5.3;4.5.3 Maasvlakte 1 and 2: Ex Post and Ex Ante Results Compared;69 1.6.6;4.6 Conclusion;71 1.6.7;References;71 1.7;Chapter 5: The Productivity of Public Capital in the Netherlands: A Regional Perspective;73 1.7.1;5.1 Introduction;73 1.7.2;5.2 Data and Methodology;75 1.7.2.
1;5.2.1 The Production Function;75 1.7.2.2;5.2.2 Data;76 1.7.2.3;5.2.3 Stylized Facts;77 1.7.3;5.3 Results;79 1.7.3.1;5.3.1 Growth Accounting;79 1.7.3.2;5.3.2 Regression Analysis;81 1.7.4;5.4 Conclusion and Discussion;84 1.7.5;References;86 1.8;Chapter 6: Indirect Effects in European Transport Project Appraisal*;87 1.8.1;6.1 Introduction;87 1.8.2;6.2 Types of Effects;88 1.8.3;6.3 The Case for Harmonisation;91 1.8.4;6.4 Current Practice;92 1.8.4.1;6.4.1 Models;92 1.8.4.1.1;6.4.1.1 The SASI Model;93 1.8.4.1.2;6.4.1.2 The CGEurope Model;95 1.8.4.2;6.4.2 Current Practice in Five Countries;95 1.8.4.2.1;6.4.2.1 The Netherlands;95 1.8.4.2.2;6.4.2.2 The UK;96 1.8.4.2.3;6.4.2.3 Germany;96 1.8.4.2.4;6.4.2.4 Japan;96 1.8.4.2.5;6.4.2.5 The USA;97 1.8.4.3;6.4.3 Survey;97 1.8.4.3.1;6.4.3.1 Is Double Counting Avoided, and How?;98 1.8.4.3.2;6.4.3.2 General Coverage and Assessment Methods;98 1.8.4.3.3;6.4.3.3 Types of Indirect Effects Covered;99 1.8.4.3.4;6.4.3.4 Overview of Types of Effects Covered in CBA;100 1.8.5;6.5 Conclusion;101 1.8.6;References;101 1.9;About the Authors;103
