Impact and cost–benefit analysis: a unifying approach

6Citations
Citations of this article
45Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper presents a methodology to integrate cost–benefit analysis and SAM-CGE-based impact evaluation. While the two types of analysis have developed in parallel and without a clear connection, there is growing consensus that the two approaches should be integrated for complex investment projects, since their economic evaluation cannot rely solely on the partial equilibrium assumptions of cost–benefit (CB) analysis. Unlike CB analysis, impact evaluation looks at the economy as a complete system of interdependent components (industries, households, investors, government, importers, exporters). By integrating project accounting into a SAM-CGE framework, the methodology developed presents several properties that make it fit to the purpose of providing a reliable assessment of project contribution to the economy.

References Powered by Scopus

The Nature of the Firm

14507Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

On the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy

493Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Input-output structural decomposition analysis: a critical appraisal

387Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

A process-based evaluation framework for environmental impacts of policy making

5Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Social impact assessment of biofuel production for maritime and aviation sectors: a case study of a pilot biorefinery project

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Photovoltaic-energy storage-integrated charging station retrofitting: A study in Wuhan city

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Scandizzo, P. L. (2021). Impact and cost–benefit analysis: a unifying approach. Journal of Economic Structures, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-021-00240-w

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 7

54%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

31%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

15%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Business, Management and Accounting 6

43%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4

29%

Engineering 3

21%

Energy 1

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
References: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free