Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
1 Civil Systems Planning Benefit/Cost Analysis Scott Matthews Final Review Courses: 12-706 and 73-359 Lecture 21 - 12/2/2002
2
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3592 Admin PS 4 Returned Today PS 5 Due Friday
3
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3593 Test Notes Is cumulative, but “end-weighted” 3-4 questions (2 decided already) ‘One’ of these might actually be a series of short questions Open book, notes, lecture notes Can Bring calculators (no laptops - shouldn’t need them) All slides in this talk from earlier classes
4
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3594 Test Hints I will not try to ‘trick’ you Will be designed for 100 mins, but will have 3 hours to finish - don’t feel need to use whole time Do not re-read text - skim familiar areas, ensure knowledge of others Re-familiarize yourself with handouts And ‘energy problems’ Look for ‘shortcuts’ (e.g. relative NPV)
5
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3595 Three Legs to Stand On Pareto Efficiency Make some better / make none worse Kaldor-Hicks Program adopted (NB>0) if winners COULD compensate losers, still be better Fundamental Principle of CBA Amongst choices, select option with highest net benefit
6
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3596 $100 0 The ‘pareto frontier’ is the set of allocations that are pareto efficent. Try improving on (25,75) or (50,50) or (75,25)… We said initial alloc. mattered - e.g. (100,0)? $25
7
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3597 Gross Benefits with WTP Price Quantity P* 0 1 2 3 4 Q* A B A B Total/Gross Benefits = area under curve = A+B = willingness to pay for all people = Social WTP = their benefit from consuming
8
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3598 Consumer Surplus Changes Price Quantity P* 0 1 2 Q* Q1 A B P1 CS2 CS2 is the new consumer surplus when price decreases to (P1, Q1) Change in CS = Trapezoid P*ABP1 = gain = positive net benefits
9
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-3599 Elasticities of Demand Measurement of how “responsive” demand is to some change in price or income. Slope of demand curve = p/ q. Elasticity of demand, , is defined to be the percent change in quantity divided by the percent change in price. = p q / q p
10
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35910 Social Surplus Social Surplus = consumer surplus + producer surplus Losses in Social Surplus are Dead-Weight Losses! Q P Q* P* S D
11
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35911 General Terms FV = $X (1+i) n X : present value, i:interest rate and n is number of periods (eg years) of interest Rule of 72 PV = $X / (1+i) n NPV=NPV(B) - NPV(C) (over time) Real vs. Nominal values
12
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35912 Notes on Estimation Move from abstract to concrete, identifying assumptions Draw from experience and basic data sources Use statistical techniques/surveys if needed Be creative, BUT Be logical and able to justify Find answer, then learn from it. Apply a reasonableness test
13
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35913 Equivalent Annual Benefit EANB=NPV/Annuity Factor Annuity factor (i=5%,n=70) = 19.343 Ann. Factor (i=5%,n=35) = 16.374 EANB(1)=$25.73/19.343=$1.330 EANB(2)=$18.77/16.374=$1.146 Still higher for option 1 Note we assumed end of period pays
14
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35914 Internal Rate of Return Defined as the discount rate where NPV=0 Graphically it is between 8-9% But we could solve otherwise E.g. 0=-100k/(1+i) + 150k /(1+i) 2 100k/(1+i) = 150k /(1+i) 2 100k = 150k /(1+i) 1+i = 1.5, i=50% -100k/1.5 + 150k /(1.5) 2 -66.67+66.67
15
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35915 Relative NPV Analysis If comparing, can just find ‘relative’ NPV compared to a single option E.g. homework 2 copier problem Solutions NPV(1)=-$18k, NPV(2)=-$16k Net difference between them was $1,536 Alternatively consider ‘net amounts’ Copier cost =-3k, salvage 2k, annual +1k -3k+(2k/1.1 4 )+(+1k/1.1)+..+(+1k/1.1 4 ) -3k+(2k*.683) +3.1699k = $1,536
16
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35916 After-tax cash flows D t = Depreciation allowance in t I t = Interest accrued in t + on unpaid balance, - overpayment Q t = available for reducing balance in t W t = taxable income in t; X t = tax rate T t = income tax in t Y t = net after-tax cash flow
17
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35917 Chap 5 - Social Discount Rate Discounting rooted in consumer preference We tend to prefer current, rather than future, consumption Marginal rate of time preference (MRTP) Face opportunity cost (of foregone interest) when we spend not save Marginal rate of investment return
18
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35918 Tradeoff of Car Problem Fuel Eff Comfort 10 5 0 2030 M(25,10) V(30,9) T C 5 The slope of the line between M and V is -1/5, I.e. you must trade one unit less of comfort for 5 units more of fuel efficiency.
19
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35919 How many variables? Choosing ‘variables’ instead of ‘constants’ for all parameters is likely to make model unsolvable Partial sens. Analysis - change only 1 Equivalent of y/ x Do for the most ‘critical’ assumptions Can use this to find ‘break-evens’
20
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35920 Best and Worst-Case Analysis Does any combination of inputs reverse the sign of our answer? If so, are those inputs reasonable? E.g. using very conservative ests. Monte carlo sens. Analysis Draw inputs from prob. Dist’ns What is resulting dist’n of net benefits?
21
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35921 Cost-Effectiveness Testing Generally, use when: Considering externality effects or damages Alternatives give same result - eg ‘reduced x’ Benefit-Cost Analysis otherwise difficult Instead of finding NB, find “cheapest” Want greatest bang for the buck Find cost “per benefit” (e.g. lives saved) Allows us to NOT include ‘social costs’
22
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35922 The CEA ratios CE = C/E Equals cost “per unit of effectiveness” e.g. dollars per lives saved, tons CO2 reduced Want to minimize CE (cheapest is best) EC = E/C Effectiveness per unit cost e.g. Lives saved per dollar Want to maximize EC No real difference between 2 ratios
23
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35923 WTP versus WTA Economics implies that WTP should be equal to ‘willingness to accept’ Turns out people want MUCH MORE in compensation for losing something WTA is factor of 4-15 higher than WTP! Also see discrepancy shrink with experience WTP formats should be used in CVs Only can compare amongst individuals
24
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35924 Life Saving Metrics Dollars/life saved Dollars/life-year saved Know how to calculate and interpret each one (see notes from those lectures for details)
25
Lecture 21: 11/28/0112-706 and 73-35925 Value - travel time savings Many studies seek to estimate VTTS Can then be used easily in CBAs Book reminds us of Waters 1993 (56 studies) Many different methods used in studies Route, speed, mode, location choices Results as % of hourly wages not a $ amount Mean value of 48% of wage rate (median 40) North America: 59%/42%
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.