2019
DOI: 10.3390/su11020364
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of the Wider Economic Impact of a Transport Infrastructure Project Using an Integrated Land Use Transport Model

Abstract: Major cities in developing countries are undergoing massive transportation infrastructure construction, which has significant impacts on the land use and economic activities in these cities. Standard Cost–Benefit Analysis (CBA) is applied to quantify the user benefits of transport projects, but does not provide an answer as to who will obtain the benefits and who will lose out and excludes the calculation of Wider Economic Impacts (WEIs) which can sometimes be large and hardly negligible. This paper introduces… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…TTS benefits seemingly intuitively sketch out how the proposed project would achieve transport-related objectives, which is typically the predominant gains evaluated when assessing the feasibility of transportation investment (Beesley, 1965). However, land use-related gains, which would have been supposed to be a key benefit but are perhaps less predictable and measurable (certainly they are not direct outputs of transport models, and are typically outside the domain of transport modelers), are generally swept off in the quantitative BCA analysis and thus fail to contribute during project prioritization and selection (Wang et al, 2019).…”
Section: Travel Time Savings Vs Access For Benefit-cost Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…TTS benefits seemingly intuitively sketch out how the proposed project would achieve transport-related objectives, which is typically the predominant gains evaluated when assessing the feasibility of transportation investment (Beesley, 1965). However, land use-related gains, which would have been supposed to be a key benefit but are perhaps less predictable and measurable (certainly they are not direct outputs of transport models, and are typically outside the domain of transport modelers), are generally swept off in the quantitative BCA analysis and thus fail to contribute during project prioritization and selection (Wang et al, 2019).…”
Section: Travel Time Savings Vs Access For Benefit-cost Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is built on the theories and experiences of its pioneers, MEPLAN and TRANUS [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. The PECAS approach has been implemented in various locations for urban and regional planning around the world over the last 15 years, including California, Caracas regions, Alberta, Oregon, and San Diego [ 27 ]. Such models are used to study the relationship between transport demand and changes in economic growth, spatial distribution/location choices of socio-economic activities, and resulting land use patterns, and to predict their changes in the future [ 26 , 28 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It does not answer the question of who will benefit and who will lose [7]. Wang et al [8] presented the reasons and the complex model of land use for transport purposes to assess the broader economic impacts of transport infrastructure projects. Semanjski and Gautama [9] stressed that cities are firmly based on efficient urban logistics to make them attractive for quality living and economic development.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%