Abstract
The state of the art in appraisal of transport infrastructure (particularly for developed countries) is moving towards inclusivity of a set of wider impacts than has traditionally been the case. In appraisal frameworks generally Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA), features as either an alternative to, or complementary with, Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) particularly when assessing a wider set of distributional and other impacts. In that respect it goes some way towards addressing an identified weakness in conventional CBA. This paper proposes a new method to incorporate the wider impacts into the appraisal framework (SUMINI) based upon a composite indicator and MCA. The method is illustrated for a particular example of the wider set of impacts, i.e. equity, through the ex-post assessment of two large EU transport infrastructure (TEN-T) case studies. The results suggest that SUMINI assesses equity impacts well and the case studies highlight the flexibility of the approach in reflecting different policy or project objectives. The research concludes that this method should not be viewed as being in competition with traditional CBA, but that it could be an easily adopted and complementary approach. The value in the research is in providing a new and significant methodological advance to the historically difficult question of how to evaluate equity and other wider impacts. The research is of strong international significance due to the publication of the TEN-Ts review by the European Commission, as well as the transnational nature of large scale interurban transport schemes, the involvement of national and transnational stakeholder groups in the approval and funding of those schemes, the large numbers of population potentially subject to equity and other wider impacts and the degree of variation in the regional objectives and priorities for transport decision makers.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The aim of Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment (TINAs in Central and Eastern Europe) was mainly to assess the needs of the new accession member states of the EU.
For example, decision makers’ views could have a weight of 50 %, and the remaining stakeholders i.e. local/regional authorities, consultants, academics, environmental NGOs, others, 10 % respectively. The distribution depends on the overall approach and decision making context though.
It is by no means argued here that the composite indicator employed within SUMINI has the same technical features as BCR within CBA, as the BCR is largely linked with welfare alterations measured through utility changes.
References
Annema, J., Koopmans, C., van Wee, B.: Evaluating transport infrastructure investments: the Dutch experience with a standardized approach. Transp. Rev. 27(2), 125–150 (2007)
Anthoff, D., Tol, R.: On international equity weights and national decision making on climate change. ESRI Res. Bull. http://hdl.handle.net/2262/57127 (2011). Accessed 02 April 2010
Arora, A., Tiwari, G.: A Handbook for Socio-Economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) of Future Urban Transport (FUT) projects, Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Program (TRIPP). Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi (2007)
Aschauer, D.: Is public expenditure productive? J. Monetary Econ. 23(2), 177–200 (1989)
Atkinson, G., Machado, F., Mourato, S.: Balancing competing principles of environmental equity. Environ. Plan. A 32, 1791–1806 (2000)
Barfod, M.: The Analytical Hierarch Process Technical Note. CTT-DTU, Copenhagen (2006)
Barfod, M., Salling, K., Leleur, S.: Composite decision support by combining cost-benefit and multi-criteria decision analysis. Decis. Support Syst. 51(1), 167–175 (2011)
Baron, J.: Thinking and deciding (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)
Berrittella, M., Certa, A., Enea, M., Zito, P.: An analytic hierarchy process for the evaluation of transport policies to reduce climate change impacts. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, CCMP, 1-23 (2007)
Beuthe, M.: Transport evaluation methods: from cost-benefit analysis to multicriteria analysis and the decision framework. In: Giorgi, L., et al. (eds.) Project and Policy Evaluation in Transport, pp. 209–241. Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Burlington (2002)
Beyazit, E.: Evaluating social justice in transport: lessons to be learned from the capability approach. Transp. Rev. 31(1), 117–134 (2011)
Bickel, P., Burgess, A., Hunt, A., Laird, J., Lieb, C., Liendberg, G., Odgaard, T.: State-of-the-art in project assessment, FP6-HEATCO Contract No. FP6-2002-SSP-1/502481 Deliverable 2. http://heatco.ier.uni-stuttgart.de/hd2final.pdf. (2005). Accessed 20 May 2011
Broecker, J., Korzhenevych, A., Schuermann, C.: Assessing spatial equity and efficiency impacts of transport infrastructure projects. Transp. Res. Part B 44(7), 795–811 (2010)
Buchanan, P., Arter, K., Buchanan, C., Meeks, R.: Agglomeration benefits of Crossrail. Association of European Transport and contributors 2006 (2006)
Camagni, R.: Territorial impact assessment for European regions: a methodological proposal and an application to EU transport policy. Eval. Prog. Plan. 32, 342–350 (2009)
CfIT.: A review of transport appraisal. Advice from the Commission for Integrated Transport (2004)
Cohen, J.: Economic benefits of investments in transport infrastructure. OECD, ITF Discussion Paper 2007-13, West Hartford (2007)
Cookson, R., Drummond, M., Weatherly, H.: Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions. Health Econ. Policy Law 4, 231–245 (2009)
De Jong, G., Geerlings, H.: Exposing weaknesses in interactive planning: the remarkable return of comprehensive policy analysis in The Netherlands. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 21(4), 281–291 (2003)
Delbosc, A., Currie, A.: Using Lorenz curves to assess public transport equity. J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 1252–1259 (2011)
De Rus, G.: Interurban passenger transport: economic assessment of major infrastructure projects. OECD, ITF Discussion Paper 2009-18, Madrid (2009)
Deakin, E.: Sustainable development and sustainable transportation: strategies for economic prosperity, environmental quality and equity. Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley (2001)
DETR.: Multi-criteria analysis: a manual. DETR appraisal guidance. By Dodgson, J., Spackman, M., Pearman, A, Phillips, L. Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions. HMSO Crown Copyright, London (2000)
DfT.: Transport, wider economic benefits, and impacts on GDP. Department for Transport Discussion Paper (2005)
DfT.: Summary guidance on social and distributional impacts of transport interventions. Transport analysis guidance (TAG). TAG Unit 2.13. Department for Transport. http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/project-manager/pdf/unit2.13.pdf (2011a). Accessed 4 April 2012
DfT.: Detailed guidance on social and distributional impacts of transport interventions. Transport analysis guidance (TAG). TAG Unit 3.17. Department for Transport. http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/expert/pdf/unit3.17.pdf (2011b). Accessed 4 April 2012
Dimitriou, H., Trueb, O.: Transportation megaprojects, globalization, and place-making in Hong Kong and South China. Transp. Res. Board 1924, 59–68 (2005)
Docherty, I., Mackie, P.: Planning for transport in the wake of Stern and Eddington. Reg. Stud. 44(8), 1085–1096 (2010)
EC.: Decision COM (2002) 542 Final. 2001/0229 (COD). 26 Sept 2002. Brussels (2002)
EC: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, Communication from the Commission, Europe 2020, COM(2010), 2020 Final, 3.3.2010 (2010)
EC.: EC European Council Review of the EU sustainable Development Strategy-Renewed Strategy 2006, Annex 10917/06 (2006)
EC.: The EU sustainable development strategy. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/ (2009a). Accessed 14 April 2011
EC.: VBTB and the evaluation function http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/evalsed/sourcebooks/capacity_building/netherlands/eval_function_en.htm (2009b). Accessed 16 May 2011
EC.: Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion5/index_en.cfm (2011a). Accessed 16 May 2011
EC.: Revision of TEN-T guidelines. DG Transport. European Commission. Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/infrastructure/connecting/revision-t_en.htm (2011b). Accessed 6 Dec 2011
EC.: Impact assessment white paper: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area: towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system (2011c)
Ecola, L., Light, T.: Making congestion pricing equitable. Transp. Res. Rec. 2187, 53–59 (2010)
Feitelson, E.: Introducing environmental equity dimensions into the sustainable transport discourse: issues and pitfalls. Transp. Res. Part D 7(2), 99–118 (2002)
Florio, M.: Cost-benefit analysis and the European Union cohesion fund: on the social cost of capital and labour. Reg. Stud. 40(2), 211–224 (2006)
Flyvbjerg, B., Richardson, T.: Planning and foucault: in search of the dark side of planning theory. In: Allmendinger, P., Tewdwr, J. (eds.) Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory, pp. 44–62. Routledge, London (2002)
Flyvbjerg, B.: Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual. Inq. 12(2), 219–245 (2006)
FMTBH.: Federal transport infrastructure plan 2003: laying the foundations for the future mobility in Germany. Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing (2003)
Gamper, C., Thoeni, M., Weck-Hannemann, H.: A conceptual approach to the use of cost benefit and multi criteria analysis in natural hazard management. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 6, 293–302 (2006)
Georgiadis, L., Bousbouras, D., Giannatos, G.: Via Egnatia case in Greece: an overview of the intervention. International Scientific-Technical Conference on the Influence of Transport Infrastructure on Nature, Poznan, 13–15 Sept 2006
Giorgi, L., Tandon, A.: Introduction: the theory and practice of evaluation. In: Project and Policy Evaluation in Transport. Ashgate, Aldershot (2002)
Gowdy, J.: The revolution in welfare economics and its implications for environmental valuation policy. Land Econ. 80(2), 239–257 (2004)
Graham, D.: Agglomeration economies and transport investment. OECD, ITF Discussion Paper 2007-11, London (2007)
Grant-Muller, S., Mackie, P., Nellthorp, J., Pearman, A.: Economic appraisal of European transport projects: the state-of-the-art revisited. Transp. Rev. 21(2), 237–261 (2001)
Grant-Muller, S., Arsenio, E.: Appraisal methodology for strategic airport planning and development—the case for the new Lisbon Airport. Proceedings of the ATRS Conference 2008, Athens (2008)
Grimsey, D., Lewis, M.: Public Private Partnerships: The Worldwide Revolution in Infrastructure Provision and Project Finance, pp. 24–25. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (2004)
Guehnemann, A.: Challenges for combining indicators. Final Conference of COST 356 EST: Towards the Definition of a Measurable Environmentally Sustainable Transport, 15 March 2010, Paris (2010)
Gutierrez, J., Condeco-Melhorado, A., Lopez, E., Monzon, A.: Evaluating the European added value of TEN-T projects: a methodological proposal based on spatial spillovers, accessibility and GIS. J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 840–850 (2011)
Haezendonck, E. (ed.): Transport Project Evaluation: Extending the Social-Cost Benefit Approach. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (2007)
Hajkowicz, S.: A comparison of multiple criteria analysis and unaided approaches to environmental decision making. Environ. Sci. Policy 10, 177–184 (2007)
Harris, J.: More and better justice. In: Bell, J., Mendus, S. (eds.) Philosophy and Medical Welfare, pp. 75–96. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988)
Hayashi, Y., Morisugi, H.: International comparison of background concept and methodology of transportation project appraisal, Transp. Policy 7(1), 73–88 (2000)
Hayles, C., Graham, M., Fong, P.: Value management for sustainable decision making. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 163(1), 43–50 (2010)
HMT.: The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government—Treasury Guidance. HM Treasury, TSO, London (2011)
Hong, J., Chu, Z., Wang, Q.: Transport infrastructure and regional economic growth: evidence from China. Transportation 1–16 (2011) doi:10.1007/s11116-011-9349-6
Jiliberto Herrera, R.: The contribution of Strategic Environmental Assessment to transport policy governance. OECD, ITF Discussion Paper 2009-30, Madrid (2009)
Johanson-Stenman, O.: The importance of ethics in environmental economics with a focus on existence values. Environ. Resour. Econ. 11(3/4), 429–442 (1998)
Khisty, : Operationalizing concepts of equity for public project investments. Transp. Res. Rec. 1559, 94–99 (1996)
King, D.: Remediating inequity in transportation finance, transportation research board. Special report 303: equity of evolving transportation finance mechanisms 2009, pp 1–19 (2011)
Laird, J., Mackie, P.: Review of economic assessment in rural transport appraisal, Transport Research Series, Scottish Government Social Research, Crown Copyright. http://scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/289775/0088769.pdf. (2009). Accessed 30 Apr 2012
Lopez, H.: The social discount rate: estimates for Nine Latin American countries. Policy Research Working Paper 4639, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, Office of the Chief Economist, World Bank (2008)
Lowry, M.: Online public deliberation for a regional transportation improvement decision. Transportation 37(1), 39–58 (2010)
Lucas, K., Grosvenor, T., Simpson, R.: Transport, the environment and social exclusion. Joseph Rowntree Foundation-York Publishing Services, York (2001)
Lucas, K., Markovich, J.: International perspectives. In: Curry, G. (ed.) New Perspectives and Methods in Transport and Social Exclusion Research. Bingley, Emerald (2011)
Mackie, P.: Cost benefit analysis in transport: a UK perspective. OECD, ITF Discussion Paper 2010-16, Leeds (2010)
Mackie, P., Nellthorp, J.: Cost-benefit analysis in transport. In: Hensher, D., Button, K. (eds.) Handbook of Transport Systems and Traffic Control, Chap 10, pp. 143–174. Pergamon, Amsterdam (2001)
Mancebo Quintana, S., Martin Ramos, B., Casermeiro Martinez, M., Otero Pastor, I.: A model for assessing habitat fragmentation caused by new infrastructures in extensive territories—evaluation of the impact of the Spanish strategic infrastructure and transport plan. J. Environ. Manage. 91, 1087–1096 (2010)
Marsden, G.: Defining and measuring progress towards a sustainable transport system. TRB Sustainable Transportation Indicators (STI) Discussion Paper (2007)
Martens, K.: Justice in transport—Applying Walzer’s ‘Spheres of justice to the transport sector’, Proceedings of the 88th annual meeting of the transportation research board (2009)
Morisugi, H.: Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in Japan. Transp. Policy 7(1), 35–40 (2000)
MOVE.: European Transport Fund Roadmap. Initial IA screening and planning of further work, 19 March 2010, Version: 1, Brussels (2010)
Nakamura, H.: The economic evaluation of transport infrastructure: needs for international comparisons. Transp. Policy 3–6 (2000)
Odgaard, T., Kelly, C., Laird, J.: Current practice in project appraisal in Europe: analysis of country reports. FP6-HEATCO Contract No. FP6-2002-SSP-1/502481 deliverable 1. http://heatco.ier.uni-stuttgart.de/hd1final.pdf (2005). Accessed 20 May 2011
OECD-JRC: Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. OECD-JRC Publication, Paris (2008)
OECD.: Improving CBA practice, Discussion Paper 2011-1. International Transport Forum—OECD. www.internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/DiscussionPapers/DP201101.pdf. (2011). Accessed 20 May 2011
Olson, B.: The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century: the failure of metropolitan planning organizations to reform federal transportation policy in metropolitan areas. J. Transp. Law 28, 147 (2000)
Ong, K., Kelaher, M., Anderson, I., Carter, R.: A cost-based equity weight for use in the economic evaluation of primary health care interventions: case study of Australian Indigenous population. Int. J. Equity Health 8(34), 1–14 (2009)
Oxman, A., Lavis, J., Lewin, S., Fretheim, A.: SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 10: taking equity into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review. Health Res. Policy Syst. 7(Suppl 1), S10 (2009). (1–9)
Partidario, M.: Does SEA change outcomes? OECD—ITF Discussion Paper 2009-31, Lisbon (2009)
Pearce, D., Atkinson, G., Mourato, S.: Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments. OECD, Paris (2006)
Phang, S.Y.: Strategic development of airport and rail infrastructure: the case of Singapore. Transp. Policy 10, 27–33 (2003)
Poslad, S., Zhenchen, W., Koolwaaij, J., Hodgson, F., Grant-Muller, S., Thomopoulos, N., Carlson, R., Schaefer, C., Hjalmarsson, A., Luther, M.: Preliminary User, System Requirements Review and Specification SUNSET Deliverable D 1.1 SUNSET Sustainable Social Network Services for Transport. http://www.sunset-project.eu/deliverables.html. (2011). Accessed 30 Apr 2012. Grant agreement no: 270228, ICT for Transport, EC, Brussels
Proost, S., van Dender, K.: What sustainable road transport future? Trends and policy options. OECD—ITF Discussion Paper 2010-14, Leuven (2010)
Proost, S., Dunkerley, F., Van der Loo, S., Adler, N., Broekcer, J., Korzhenevyc, A.: Do the selected Trans European transport investments pass the cost benefit test? CES Discussion Paper, 10.02 (2010)
Proost, S., Dunkerley, F., De Borger, B., Guehneman, A., Koskenoja, P., Mackie, P., Van der Loo, S.: When are subsidies to trans-European network projects justified? Transp. Res. Part A 45, 161–170 (2011)
Quinet, E.: The practice of cost-benefit analysis in transport: the case of France. OECD—ITF Discussion Paper 2010-17, Paris (2010)
Radej, B.: Synthesis in policy impact evaluation. SDE Working Papers, 4th revision, Slovenian Evaluation Society, Ljubljana, 1(3) pp 1–22 (2011)
Rawls, J.: Concepts of distributional equity—Some reasons for the maximin criterion. Am Econ. Rev. 6(2), 141–146 (1974)
Rietveld, P.: Equity, efficiency and compensation in transport policy. In: Henscher, D., Button, K. (eds.) Handbook of Transport Modelling, vol. 4, pp. 585–602. Pergamon, London (2003)
Rogers, P., Jalal, K., Boyd, J.: An introduction to Sustainable Development. Earthscan, London (2008)
Rothengatter, W.: Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in Germany. Transp. Policy 7, 17–25 (2000)
Saaty, T.: The Analytical Hierachy Process. Wiley, New York (1980)
Saaty, T.L.: Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh (1999)
SEC.: 358 final, 28 March 2011. European Commission, Brussels (2011)
Saitua, R.: Some considerations on social cost-benefit analysis as a tool for decision making. In: Haezendonck, E. (ed.) Transport Project Evaluation: Extending the Social Cost-Benefit Approach, pp. 23–34. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2007)
Saltelli, A., Jesinghaus, J., Munda, G.: Well being stories, Beyond GDP Conference, Experts Workshop, 19–20 Nov 2007 (2008)
Sanchez, L., Silva-Sanchez, S.: Tiering strategic environmental assessment and project environmental impact assessment in highway planning in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 28, 515–522 (2008)
Schweigert, F.: The priority of justice: a framework approach to ethics in program evaluation. Eval. Prog. Plan. 30(4), 394–399 (2007)
SEC: Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network, Annex to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the European Council, Annex I, Volume 23, COM (2011) 650,SEC (2011) 1212/1213 (2011)
Sen, A.: Collective Choice and Social Welfare. Holden Day, San Francisco (1970)
Shang, J., Youxu, T., Yizhong, D.: A unified framework for multicriteria evaluation of transportation projects. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 51(3), 300–313 (2004)
Shiftan, Y., Sharaby, N., Solomon, C.: Transport project appraisal in Israel. Transp. Res. Board 2079, 136–145 (2008)
SPECTRUM-D6.: Measurement and Treatment of High Level Impacts, version 14/5/2004, Deliverable 6. EC FP5. Project co-ordinator: Dr S. Grant-Muller, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds. Study of Policies regarding Economic instruments Complementing Transport Regulation and the Undertaking of physical Measures www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/spectrum/ (2004). Accessed 20 May 2011
Sturm, J., De Haan, J.: Is public expenditure really productive? New evidence for the USA and the Netherlands. Econ. Model. 12(1), 60–72 (1995)
Sue Wing, I., Anderson, W., Lakshaman, T.: The broader benefits of transportation infrastructure. OECD—ITF Discussion Paper No. 2007-10, Boston (2007)
Taebi, B., Kadak, A.: Intergenerational considerations affecting the future of nuclear power: equity as a framework for assessing fuel cycles. Risk Anal. 30(9), 1341–1362 (2010)
Thanos, S., Wardman, M., Bristow, A.: Valuing aircraft noise: stated choice experiments reflecting inter-temporal noise changes from airport relocation. Environ. Resour. Econ. (2011). doi:10.1007/s10640-011-9482-x
Thomopoulos, N., Grant-Muller, S., Tight, M.: Incorporating equity considerations in transport infrastructure evaluation: current practice and a proposed methodology. Eval. Prog. Plan. 32, 351–359 (2009)
Thomopoulos, N.: Incorporating equity considerations in the appraisal of large transport infrastructure projects. PhD thesis, University of Leeds (2010)
Timms, P.: Transport models, philosophy and language. Transportation 35, 395–410 (2008)
Todd, H., Zografos, C.: Justice for the environment: developing a set of indicators of environmental justice for Scotland. Environ. Values 14(4), 483–501 (2005)
Tsamboulas, D., Yiotis, G., Panou, K.: Use of multicriteria methods for assessment of transport projects. J. Transp. Eng. 1125(5), 407–414 (1999)
Tsolakis, D., Preski, K., Hougton, N.: Guide to project evaluation Part 6: distributional (equity) effects. AGPE06/05, Austroads, Sydney (2005)
Tudela, A., Akiki, N., Cisternas, R.: Comparing the output of cost benefit and multi-criteria analysis: an application to urban transport investments. Transp. Res. Part A 40(5), 414–423 (2006)
Turner, K.: Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects. Environ. Resour. Econ. 37(1), 253–269 (2007)
Van Wee, B.: Transport and Ethics: Ethics and the Evaluation of Transport Policies and Projects. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2011)
Van Wee, B.: How suitable is CBA for the ex-ante evaluation of transport projects and policies? A discussion from the perspective of ethics. Transp. Policy 19(1), 1–7 (2012)
Van Wee, B., Geurs, K.: Discussing equity and social exclusion in accessibility evaluations. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 11(4), 350–367 (2011)
Veron, A.: Brazil: improving the appraisal framework for road transport infrastructure investments: elements for consideration. World Bank, Transport Sector Board, Transport Papers. TP-29. Washington DC, (2010)
Vickerman, R.: Cost-benefit analysis and large-scale infrastructure projects: state of the art and challenges. Environ. Plan. B 34, 598–610 (2007)
Wallington, T., Bina, O., Thissen, W.: Theorising strategic environmental assessment: fresh perspectives and future challenges. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 27(7), 569–584 (2007)
Weinstein, A., Sciara, G.C.: Unravelling equity in HOT lane planning: a view from practice. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 26(2), 174–184 (2006)
Wiegmans, B.: The economics of a new rail freight line: the case of the Betuweline in the Netherlands. In: Proceedings of the European Transport Conference, Association of European Transport and contributors, Oct 2008. Leeuwenhorst, The Netherlands (2008)
Willis, K.: Cost-benefit analysis. In: Button, K., Hensher, D. (eds.) Handbook of Transport Strategy, Policy and Institutions, pp. 491–506. Elsevier, Oxford (2005)
Weisbrod, G., Lynch, T., Meyer, M.: Extending monetary values to broader performance and impact measures: transportation applications and lessons for other fields. Eval. Progr. Plan. 32(4), 332–341 (2009)
Worsley, T.: The evolution of London’s Crossrailscheme and the development of the Department for Transports Economic Appraisal Methods, Major transport infrastructure projects and regional economic developments—assessment and implementation, ITF/OECD Joint Transport Research Centre Roundtable 152, 1–2 Dec 2011
Yin, R.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn. Sage, London (2009)
Young, H.: Equity: In Theory and Practice. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994)
Zhou, K., Sheate, W.: EIA application in China’s expressway infrastructure: clarifying the decision-making hierarchy. J. Environ. Manage. 92, 1471–1483 (2011)
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all stakeholders for their time and contribution to this research, alongside the participants of the ERSA 2010 Summer school in Sweden for providing useful feedback on the first draft of this paper. The authors are also grateful to three anonymous referees for their constructive comments and feedback on previous drafts. Finally the authors are thankful for the financial support provided by the Royal Economic Society. Any errors or omissions remain of course with the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thomopoulos, N., Grant-Muller, S. Incorporating equity as part of the wider impacts in transport infrastructure assessment: an application of the SUMINI approach. Transportation 40, 315–345 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9418-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9418-5