Skip to main content

The Economics of Mega-projects

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Megaproject Management

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology ((BRIEFSPOLIMI))

Abstract

Mega-projects play a foremost role not only in developed countries, but mainly in developing countries in several respects: political dynamics, social effects, and economic fallout (see Bovensiepen and Meitzner Yoder in Asia Pac J Anthropol 19(5):381–394, 2018, [4]). As correctly stated by van Wee and Tavasszy in Decision-making on mega-projects—cost-benefit analysis, planning and innovation, pp 40–65, 2008, [31], first, they are heavily under debate at the political level because of their economic impacts and important budget implications; in fact mega-projects are “large-scale, complex ventures that typically cost $1 billion or more, take many years to develop and build, involve multiple public and private stakeholders, are transformational, and impact millions of people” (see Flyvbjerg in The Oxford handbook of megaproject management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–18, 2017, [15]). Second, there is a lively debate also among scholars and practitioners owing to the huge cost escalation and schedule delay of these projects (see Flyvbjerg et al. in Megaprojects and risk: an anatomy of ambition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003a, [8], Odeck in Transp Policy 11(1):43–53, 2004, [22]), but also due to the uncertainty of their wider economic effects, which can be interpreted as related externalities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    The main projects of the Megaprojects EU Cost Action are the Seville Metro Line and the Zagreb on the Sava River in Croatia, those of the OMEGA research are the Lignes à Grande Vitesse (LGV) Méditerranée and the Athens Metro Base (AMB) Project, and those of the NETLIPSE network are the Highway A73-South in The Netherlands and the Lötschberg Base Tunnel in Switzerland.

  2. 2.

    Whereas the evaluation is intended to be the process of determining the worth of something, the valuation is the estimation of something’s monetary worth.

  3. 3.

    Whereas CEA is a form of economic analysis that compares the relative costs and outcomes (effects) of different courses of action, CUA is an economic analysis used to evaluate medical-health investment projects in which the incremental cost of a program from a particular point of view is compared to the incremental health improvement expressed in the unit of quality adjusted life years (QALYs).

  4. 4.

    Because sometimes it is impossible to give a monetary value to the costs or to the benefits, Guess and Farnham [17] suggest to use the Risk Analysis (RA) method, which “consists of the repeated random extraction of a set of values for the critical variables, taken within the respective defined intervals, and then calculating the performance indices for the project resulting from each set of extracted values” (see [5], p. 63).

  5. 5.

    Methods frequently used to estimate these input parameters are Scenario Analysis (SA), Decision Trees (DT), and Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS).

  6. 6.

    Whereas if a project’s \(NPV\) is positive or negative, then the project is expected to result in a net gain or loss respectively, if a project’s \(NPV\) is zero then the project is not expected to result in any significant gain or loss, and thus the investment decision has to be based on non-monetary factors.

  7. 7.

    Following the same logic used for the \(NPV\), whereas if a project’s \(PI\) is greater or smaller than 1, then the project is expected to result in a net gain or loss respectively, if a project’s \(PI\) is equal to 1 then the project is not expected to result in any significant loss or gain, and thus the investment decision has to be based on non-monetary factors.

  8. 8.

    The discounted pay-back time is computed as \(NPV = \mathop \sum \nolimits_{t = 0}^{T} CF_{t} /\left( {1 + r} \right)^{t} \Rightarrow \mathop \sum \nolimits_{t = 0}^{PBT} CF_{t} /\left( {1 + r} \right)^{t} = 0\); note that the discounting lengthens the recovery period.

References

  1. Atkin B (2015) Megaprojects planning and management: essential readings. Constr Manage Econ 33(9):771–774

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Atkinson R (1999) Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria. Int J Project Manage 17(6):337–342

    Google Scholar 

  3. Belyadi H, Fathi E, Belyadi F (2017) Economic evaluation. In: Belyadi H, Fathi E, Belyadi F (ed) Hydraulic fracturing in unconventional reservoirs, Gulf Professional Publishing—Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 324–392. Chapter 18

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bovensiepen J, Meitzner Yoder LS (2018) Introduction: the political dynamics and social effects of megaproject development. Asia Pac J Anthropol 19(5):381–394

    Google Scholar 

  5. CBA Guide Team (2008) Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects—structural funds, cohesion fund and instrumental for pre-accession. European Commission—Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy—Publication Office, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cleland, DI, King WR (1983) Project management handbook. Wiley Online Library—Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  7. de Jong G, Vignetti S, Pancotti C (2018) Ex post evaluation of major transport infrastructure projects. In: European transport conference 2018, Association for European transport (AET) 2018 and contributors

    Google Scholar 

  8. Flyvbjerg B, Bruzelius N, Rothengatter W (2003) Megaprojects and risk: an anatomy of ambition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  9. Flybjerg B, Holm MKS, Buhl SL (2003) How common and how large are cost overruns in transport infrastructure projects? Transp Rev 23(1):71–88

    Google Scholar 

  10. Flybjerg B, Holm MKS, Buhl SL (2004) What causes cost overrun in transport infrastructure projects? Transp Rev 24(1):3–18

    Google Scholar 

  11. Flybjerg B, Holm MKS, Buhl SL (2005) How (in)accurate are demand forecasts in public works projects? The case of transportation. J Am Plan Assoc 71(2):131–146

    Google Scholar 

  12. Flybjerg B (2007) Policy and planning for large-infrastructure projects: problems, causes, cures. Environ Plan B 34(4):578–597

    Google Scholar 

  13. Flyvbjerg B (2010) Over budget, over time, over and over again—managing major projects. In: Morris WG, Pinto JK, Söderlund J (ed) The Oxford handbook of project management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 321–344. Chapter 13

    Google Scholar 

  14. Flyvbjerg B (2014) What you should know about megaprojects and why: an overview. Proj Manag J 45(2):6–19

    Google Scholar 

  15. Flyvbjerg B (2017) Introduction: the iron law of megaproject management. In: Flyvbjerg B (ed) The Oxford handbook of megaproject management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–18. Chapter 1

    Google Scholar 

  16. Garemo N, Matzinger S, Palter R (2015) Megaprojects: the good, the bad, and the better. McKinsey & Company—Capital Projects & Infrastructure, July

    Google Scholar 

  17. Guess GM, Farnham PG (2000) Cases in public policy analysis. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ika LA, Diallo A, Thuillier D (2012) Critical success factors for World Bank projects: an empirical investigation. J Proj Manag 30(1):105–116

    Google Scholar 

  19. JICA (2004) Guideline for project evaluation—practical methods for project evaluation. Office of Evaluation, Planning and Coordination Department—Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mišić S, Radujković M (2015) Critical drivers of megaprojects success and failure. Procedia Eng 122(9):71–80

    Google Scholar 

  21. Odeck J (2004) Cost overruns in road construction–what are their sizes and determinants? Transp Policy 11(1):43–53

    Google Scholar 

  22. OECD (2009) Glossary of key terms in evaluation and results based management. OECD Publications, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pinto JK, Kharbanda OP (1996) How to fail in project management (without really trying). Bus Oriz 39(4):45–53

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pinto J, Mantel S (1990) The cause of project failure. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 37(4):269–276

    Google Scholar 

  25. Samset K (2003) Project evaluation—making investment succeed. Fagbokforlaget, Bergen

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sartori D, Catalano G, Genco M, Pancotti C, Sirtori E, Del Bo C (2014) Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects—economic appraisal tool for cohesion policy 2014–2020. European Commission—Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy—Publication Office, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sherman G, Siebers P-O, Menachof D, Aickelin U (2012) Evaluating different cost-benefit analysis methods for port security operations. In: Faulin J, Juan AA, Grasman SE, Fry MJ (ed) Decision making in service industries: a practical approach. CRC Press—Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 279–302. Chapter 12

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tabish SZS, Jha KN (2011) Identification and evaluation of success factors for public construction projects. Constr Manag Econ 29(8):809–823

    Google Scholar 

  29. van Wee B, Tavasszy LA (2008) Ex-ante evaluation of mega-projects: methodological issues and cost-benefit analysis. In: Priemus H, Flyvbjerg B, van Wee B (ed) Decision-making on mega-projects—cost-benefit analysis, planning and innovation, pp 40–65, Chapter 3

    Google Scholar 

  30. Worsley T (2014) Ex-post assessment of transport investments and policy interventions: roundtable summary and conclusions. International Transport Forum Discussion Papers, No. 19, OECD Publications, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zidane YJ-T, Johansen A, Ekambarum A (2015) Project evaluation holistic framework—application on megaproject case. Procedia Comput Sci 64:409–416

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zidane YJ-T, Johansen A, Husseun BA, Andersen B (2016) PESTOL—framework for project evaluation on strategic, tactical and operational levels. Int J Inf Syst Proj Manag 4(3):25–41

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silvia Platoni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Platoni, S., Timpano, F. (2020). The Economics of Mega-projects. In: Favari, E., Cantoni, F. (eds) Megaproject Management. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39354-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39354-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-39353-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-39354-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics