1 / 20

Christina van Breugel, Tine Skyggebjerg, Szabolcs Szekeres, Birgitte Holt Andersen (COWI)

Ex Post evaluation of cohesion policy intervention 2000-2006 financed by the Cohesion Fund (incl. ISPA) WP C – CBA of Environmental Projects Workshop with Member States, Brussels 3 February 2011 Session 2: Introduction and findings of 10 Environment Projects of WP C.

dwiggins
Télécharger la présentation

Christina van Breugel, Tine Skyggebjerg, Szabolcs Szekeres, Birgitte Holt Andersen (COWI)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ex Post evaluation of cohesion policy intervention 2000-2006 financed by the Cohesion Fund (incl. ISPA) WP C – CBA of Environmental ProjectsWorkshop with Member States,Brussels 3 February 2011Session 2: Introduction and findings of 10 Environment Projects of WP C Christina van Breugel, Tine Skyggebjerg, Szabolcs Szekeres, Birgitte Holt Andersen (COWI) Davide Sartori, Silvia Vignetti (Csil) Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  2. Overview of the 10 case studies 17 Barcelona 01 Bulgaria 06 Crete Water management 09 Zaragosa 03 Pilsen Waste management 13 Madrid 50 Portugal 22 Dublin 29 Poland Waste water management 27 Hungary Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  3. Outline of presentation • Presentation of the Ex ante situation • Reporting of results of ex post CBA • Main differences from ex ante to ex post • Typical components and typical benefits • Waste management projects • Water Management projects • Waste water projects • Main findings related to: • Ex ante CBA • Ex post CBA Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  4. 1. Ex ante situationMain driver for project initiation and project context Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  5. 1. Ex ante situationEx ante assumptions, financial and economic analysis Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  6. 1. Ex ante situationThe use of CBA for project formulation and decision • One thing is the quality of the ex ante – another thing is HOW the CBA was actually used for project formulation and decision making • CBA used for project formulation? • NO - Why not? • since most projects emerged to comply with legislation • project is part of a larger context (Master Plan) • CBA used as basis for decision making? • Not really, perhaps due to the timing of CBA 'The city authorities opted for this project largely because they were told that only such an integrated project would be eligible for financing' Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  7. 1. Ex ante situationThe timing of the CBA CBA Construction Operation Tendering Application EIA process/develpment consents Project formulation The project is usually already a part of a process or part of a regional or local Master Plan The Project needs to be seen in this context Project identification 3-5 years 3-5 years 30 years Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  8. 2. Reporting on results of ex post analysis Most projects investigated appear to be sensible investments as they provide for fundamental EU environmental infrastructures ('needs to have'/legal compliance) In economic terms however only one project generate positive ex post ENPV meaning that economic benefits justify the costs Few problems with either over-capacity or under-capacity The implemented technical solutions are with one exception sensible and reasonable Size of investment costs appear more or less reasonable according to our technical experts There are however unrealised benefits in some of the projects Wider benefits include: improved environmental awareness among citizens, political benefits, enabling benefits, etc. Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  9. 2. Reporting on results of ex post analysisOutcome of the projects (1/2) Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  10. 2. Reporting on results of ex post analysisOutcome of the projects (2/2) Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  11. 3. Main differences from ex ante to ex post Economic results • overestimated or arbitrary economic benefits • unrealised benefits Financial results • higher operational costs • lower operational income • project delays • investment costs overrun Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  12. 3. Main differences from ex ante to ex postResults of financial and economic analysis (1/2) EX ANTE • The investments has risen due to budget overruns – some ex-post CBA are only done for some of the component and are therefore not comparable • The FNPV are small or even negative – the negative results are larger in the ex-post analyses - no good business cases have been identified • The ENPV are more positive in the ex-ante analyses than the ex-post CBAs – When complying with legislation a less positive ENPV could be accepted as it is part of a higher level objective of generally improving the environment Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  13. 3. Main differences from ex ante to ex postResults of financial and economic analysis (2/2) • Few B/C ratios above 1 • A number of the benefits have only been qualitatively described in the CBAs due to lack of benefit estimates • A number of projects have experienced overcapacity • Barcelona – improved marine water quality • Hungary – covers just a section the Tisza river • Bulgaria - is part of a master plan of national waste handling Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  14. 4. The typical components and typical benefits of the different types of projects Waste management Drinking water management Waste water treatment Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  15. Waste Management Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  16. Water supply Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  17. Waste Water Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  18. 5. A) Main findings related to ex ante CBA • Recommendations: • Do the CBAs much earlier in the process. A solid CBA should precede doing the final technical design of the project • CBA thinking should apply to the selection of alternatives, prior to the final design of the project • CBA to be related to the Master Plan context • Cost efficiency analysis could be considered for 'need to have' projects The main CBA ex ante issues: • not integrated in the decision process • not looking at individual components • missing the bigger pictures (e.g. synergies, risk un-realised benefits) Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  19. 5. B) Main findings related to ex post CBA • Considerations • break-even analysis might be more convincing to illustrate economic surplus/deficit • develop a price and benefit catalogue (Excel tool) to support CBA in practice • CBA to be combined with other qualitative impact assessment methodologies to improve the capturing of wider benefits This study has used CBA for ex post impact assessment and have drawn some lessons: starting from individual components is the easiest way to identify the benefit elements concentrate on valorisation of the main benefit elements, if too uncertain the result is altered unreasonable the wider benefits are often important outcomes but are difficult to quantify Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

  20. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Ex post eval cohesion fund_DG Regio

More Related