This paper compares cost benefit analysis (CBA) approaches to urban rail project evaluation in Australia, the US, the UK, Canada, New Zealand, Germany, Holland, France, Japan, Hong Kong, the Republic of Korea and Singapore. The key findings on the different aspects of the CBA framework from a strategic viewpoint, as well as the different parameter values adopted, are presented. In each case the analysis presented is based on published evidence. Published evidence can lag behind the practice of evaluation in this field and hence this exercise may not have included the latest development in national CBA applications. This is a limitation which this research has had to accept. In most cases published national guidelines were used to inform about CBA approaches. For Japan, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Republic of Korea and Singapore the guidelines are not published or available for our analysis. In these cases, CBA approaches were derived from research papers or obtained via email correspondence with the relevant authorities. (a) For the covering entry of this conference, please see ITRD abstract no. E217541.
Abstract