# Ex Post evaluation of cohesion policy intervention 2000-2006 financed by the Cohesion Fund (incl. ISPA) WP C – CBA of Environmental Projects Workshop.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Workshop with EU Member States: Work Package B Session 4a – Cost-benefit analysis for transport investments 3 February 2011.
Advertisements

Regional Policy Delegated Acts. Regional Policy 2 Delegated ActsImplementing Acts 32(10): Purchase of land and combination of TA with FI 33(3)(a):FI complying.
# Ex Post evaluation of cohesion policy intervention financed by the Cohesion Fund (incl. ISPA) WP C – CBA of Environmental Projects Workshop.
# Ex Post evaluation of cohesion policy intervention financed by the Cohesion Fund (incl. ISPA) WP C – CBA of Environmental Projects Workshop.
1 Ex post evaluation of Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) Evaluation Network Meeting Brussels, February 25 th 2010.
1 Cohesion Policy Evaluation Network Meeting: Brussels, October 2010 Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy interventions financed.
1 Ex post evaluation of the Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) Work Package B: cost - benefit analysis of selected transport projects Jurate Vaznelyte,
1 Seminar on the economic evaluation of transport projects The rationale for economic evaluation in Europe The case of EU regional policy A.Mairate, European.
Competition Effects of the Renewable Energy Policy Reform in Flanders: Is the Flemish market for Green Electricity Certificates working properly? Annemie.
CIRAS PROJECT OVERVIEW
 There is no such thing as a child-neutral policy  Every policy positively or negatively affects the lives of children  To comply with the CRC, the.
1 Regional policy The Resource BOOK of PPP case studies Second International workshop on PPP Brussels 5th July Roberto Ridolfi.
Introduction and the Context The Use and value of Urban Planning.
1. 2 Content Principles of the Water Framework Directive WFD and Agriculture WFD and CAP.
“Building Effective Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context” in Bulgaria Institute for Ecological Modernisation.
Ex post evaluation of a sample of projects co-financed by the Cohesion Fund ( ) EEA Financial Mechanism, Brussels 13 June 2005.
Chapter 2 A Strategy for the Appraisal of Public Sector Investments.
1 Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy interventions financed by the Cohesion Fund Work Package C – cost-benefit analysis of selected environment.
Expressing Environmental Impact in Monetary Units - Environmental Accounting/Costing Approaches.
New work on assessing the impacts of policy on cohesion Cliff Hague (I’m really going to talk about Territorial Impact Assessment)
This project is funded by the European Union ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATION FOR THE BLACK SEA GEORGIA, MOLDOVA, RUSSIA and UKRAINE Euroconsult This project.
The Hungarian system of ex post and on-going evaluation focusing on Structural Funds Kinga Kenyeres, Evaluation Division6-7 May, 2010 National Development.
COHESION FUND MONITORING COMMITTEE 11 April 2008 Jurijs Spiridonovs Ministry of Environment Head of Project Development Department.
Regulatory Transparency and Interaction with the Government Dr. Konstantin Petrov Head of Section, Policy and Regulation.
PEIP National workshop in Montenegro: developing environmental infrastructure projects in the water sector Feasibility Study Preparation Venelina Varbova.
Integrating Statistics in Development PLANNING 18 June 2014 High Level Seminar and Workshop on ACSS Strategic Plan Hotel Salak, Bogor Indonesia.
WLI REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE WORKSHOP ON DECISION-SUPPORT TOOLS AND MODELS SEPTEMBER, 2013, JERBA, TUNISIA Economic analysis of improved water.
Cross-cutting areas of Capacity Building and Adaptation UNDP Workshop for NIS Environmental Focal Points June 2004.
1 Hsin Chu, August 2012 Regulatory Impact Assessment Charles-Henri Montin, Senior Regulatory Expert, Ministry of economy and finance, Paris
JASPERS in the Environment, Energy and Municipal Sectors Cost – Benefit Analysis Prague, 28 th November 2007.
1 European Union Regional Policy – Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion The new architecture for cohesion policy post-2013 High-Level Meeting on the.
1 Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities (RFSC) Some useful functionalities for Finnish cities.
Discussion Topic 2 Discussions TOPIC 2: Implementation costs.
Building a Business Case for Quality Improvement Glen Copping CFO and Vice-President, Systems Development & Performance Session: BC PSQC D2 Thursday, February.
Water Rights and Policies: Water Institutions and governance Dr. Bas JM van Vliet, Environmental Policy Group Wageningen University April 2006.
The TIDE impact assessment methodology TIDE Final Conference Barcelona, September 2015 Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy Oliver.
1 Cohesion Policy Adam Abdulwahab Evaluation network meeting Brussels, 21 September 2009 Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy programmes
Project Cycle Management for International Development Cooperation Indicators Teacher Pietro Celotti Università degli Studi di Macerata 16 December 2011.
Transport Enhancing TEN-T funding Pawel Stelmaszczyk Special Envoy for European Mobility Network DG MOVE Warsaw, 18 December 2013.
Regional Policy Ex post Evaluation of the Cohesion Fund and ISPA in period Adam Abdulwahab Evaluation Unit DG Regional Policy Evalaution network.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNECE Transport Division 1 TRANS-EUROPEAN RAILWAY (TER) PROJECT 2 nd Expert Group Meeting (Budapest, 23 September.
SEA in the Czech Republic Prague, 24 September 2008.
1 Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) ex post evaluation Jurate Vaznelyte, Adam Abdulwahab Evaluation Network Meeting Brussels, April 14 th.
Rob Verheem The Netherlands EIA Commission
Reporting requirements - contractual and financial issues NGO Kick-off meeting Lorenzina Bruno, Senior Financial Officer Manuel Montero Ramírez, Project.
Workshop on Disproportionate Costs, 10./ Copenhagen Summary and draft conclusions 11 April 2008.
© EIPA – Robin Smail / Ex-ante Project Appraisal & project selection 1 Robin Smail Senior Lecturer CoR / DG Regio Open Days 28 September 2004 Steps for.
COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS, DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND THE EU COHESION FUND: LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE Massimo Florio and Silvia Vignetti University of Milan and.
Socially Acceptable Costs for Municipal Solid Waste Management Services Vojtěch Doležal, SEWACO s.r.o 24 June 2015 ISWA Study Tour WASTE-TO-ENERGY.
Costs, Benefits and Alternatives Getting the most out of the new RMA Section 32 requirements.
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE RISK ASSESSMENT SUPPORT CIRAS PROJECT OVERVIEW 2nd Stakeholders’ Workshop Aschaffenburg, November, 26th, 2015 Jaime Martín, Project.
University of Belgrade-Faculty of mining and geology
Template Contents of the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS)
GUIDELINES Evaluation of National Rural Networks
EWG Study Tour, Galway, 18/09/2006
SIIF pilot support group Meeting 17 Apr 2013
Preparations for post-2020 Impact Assessment European Commission Directorate General for Regional and Urban Policy Unit DGA Policy.
Supporting Cities and Regions through Projects and Programmes
Evaluation plans for programming period in Poland
COHESION FUND MONITORING COMMITTEE
Adam Abdulwahab Evaluation network meeting Brussels, 25 February 2010
State of play on the preparation of PoMs
Accountability Issues in Proposal Writing
Support Tools for ESF Evaluation
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
EU Water Policy and Legislation Recent developments and next steps
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Workshop on GRP, Quito, Ecuador, 7-9 Nov. 2018
Assessment of Member States‘ 2nd River Basin Management Plans
Jeannette Monier and Louise Reid
Presentation transcript:

# Ex Post evaluation of cohesion policy intervention financed by the Cohesion Fund (incl. ISPA) WP C – CBA of Environmental Projects Workshop with Member States, Brussels 3 February 2011 Session 2: Introduction and findings of 10 Environment Projects of WP C Christina van Breugel, Tine Skyggebjerg, Szabolcs Szekeres, Birgitte Holt Andersen (COWI) Davide Sartori, Silvia Vignetti (Csil) 1 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# Overview of the 10 case studies 2 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Waste management Water management Waste water management 01 Bulgaria 03 Pilsen 17 Barcelona 06 Crete 09 Zaragosa 27 Hungary 22 Dublin 13 Madrid 29 Poland 50 Portugal

# Outline of presentation 1.Presentation of the Ex ante situation 2.Reporting of results of ex post CBA 3.Main differences from ex ante to ex post 4.Typical components and typical benefits  Waste management projects  Water Management projects  Waste water projects 5.Main findings related to:  Ex ante CBA  Ex post CBA 3 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 1. Ex ante situation Main driver for project initiation and project context 4 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 1. Ex ante situation Ex ante assumptions, financial and economic analysis 5 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 1. Ex ante situation The use of CBA for project formulation and decision  One thing is the quality of the ex ante – another thing is HOW the CBA was actually used for project formulation and decision making  CBA used for project formulation? –NO - Why not? (a)since most projects emerged to comply with legislation (b) project is part of a larger context (Master Plan)  CBA used as basis for decision making? –Not really, perhaps due to the timing of CBA 6 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio 'The city authorities opted for this project largely because they were told that only such an integrated project would be eligible for financing'

# 1. Ex ante situation The timing of the CBA 7 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Problem Political decision I "Master plan" Application (e.g. option analysis, CBA…) Political decision II CBA Project identification Project formulation EIA process/develpment consents Application Tendering ConstructionOperation 3-5 years 30 years The project is usually already a part of a process or part of a regional or local Master Plan The Project needs to be seen in this context

# 2. Reporting on results of ex post analysis  Most projects investigated appear to be sensible investments as they provide for fundamental EU environmental infrastructures ('needs to have'/legal compliance)  In economic terms however only one project generate positive ex post ENPV meaning that economic benefits justify the costs  Few problems with either over-capacity or under-capacity  The implemented technical solutions are with one exception sensible and reasonable  Size of investment costs appear more or less reasonable according to our technical experts  There are however unrealised benefits in some of the projects  Wider benefits include: improved environmental awareness among citizens, political benefits, enabling benefits, etc. 8 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 2. Reporting on results of ex post analysis Outcome of the projects (1/2) 9 3 March 2010 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 2. Reporting on results of ex post analysis Outcome of the projects (2/2) 10 3 March 2010 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 3. Main differences from ex ante to ex post Financial results –higher operational costs –lower operational income –project delays –investment costs overrun 11 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Economic results –overestimated or arbitrary economic benefits –unrealised benefits

# 3. Main differences from ex ante to ex post Results of financial and economic analysis (1/2) 12 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio EX ANTE The investments has risen due to budget overruns – some ex-post CBA are only done for some of the component and are therefore not comparable The FNPV are small or even negative – the negative results are larger in the ex-post analyses - no good business cases have been identified The ENPV are more positive in the ex-ante analyses than the ex-post CBAs – When complying with legislation a less positive ENPV could be accepted as it is part of a higher level objective of generally improving the environment

# 3. Main differences from ex ante to ex post Results of financial and economic analysis (2/2) 13 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Few B/C ratios above 1 A number of the benefits have only been qualitatively described in the CBAs due to lack of benefit estimates A number of projects have experienced overcapacity Barcelona – improved marine water quality Hungary – covers just a section the Tisza river Bulgaria - is part of a master plan of national waste handling

# 4. The typical components and typical benefits of the different types of projects  Waste management  Drinking water management  Waste water treatment 14 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

# 15 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Waste Management

# 16 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Water supply

# 17 3 Feb 2011 Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Waste Water

# 5. A) Main findings related to ex ante CBA The main CBA ex ante issues:  not integrated in the decision process  not looking at individual components  missing the bigger pictures (e.g. synergies, risk un-realised benefits) 18 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Recommendations:  Do the CBAs much earlier in the process. A solid CBA should precede doing the final technical design of the project  CBA thinking should apply to the selection of alternatives, prior to the final design of the project  CBA to be related to the Master Plan context  Cost efficiency analysis could be considered for 'need to have' projects

# 5. B) Main findings related to ex post CBA This study has used CBA for ex post impact assessment and have drawn some lessons: 1)starting from individual components is the easiest way to identify the benefit elements 2)concentrate on valorisation of the main benefit elements, if too uncertain the result is altered unreasonable 3)the wider benefits are often important outcomes but are difficult to quantify 19 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio Considerations 1)break-even analysis might be more convincing to illustrate economic surplus/deficit 2)develop a price and benefit catalogue (Excel tool) to support CBA in practice 3)CBA to be combined with other qualitative impact assessment methodologies to improve the capturing of wider benefits

# 20 3 Feb 2011Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!