[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/clh/resear/v10y2017i28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Business Cases for Major Public Infrastructure Projects in Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Iacobacci

    (Deloitte Canada)

Abstract
When governments announce that they are going to spend vast sums of taxpayers’ money on a new public infrastructure project, you can be certain they will praise all the terrific new benefits that the project will bring to citizens, making everyone’s life easier, safer, greener and better. But this does not tell us whether we are better off as a society, after accounting for the cost of these projects borne by taxpayers today and well into the future. In reality, there is a meaningful risk that a project undertaken without a proper business case could end up making citizens’ lives worse. That new commuter train might look sleek and shiny and seem convenient for some, but a close business case analysis of recent transit projects in Canada’s three largest cities suggests that in as many as four cases out of 21 projects, the burden of paying for the projects does not justify the public investment. In a review of thirteen recent public transit projects in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), at least three projects had benefits that fell short of the costs. Yet, all three projects went ahead (or have been funded). Only one project showed large net benefits for citizens once all considerations were accounted for. Three projects showed small net benefits – of a size that can be easily offset by a modest cost over-run. The six remaining projects did not have any publicly available business cases. In the Greater Montreal area, a review of three recent major transit projects turned up no evidence of a publicly available business case for any of them. As a result, Montrealers are in the dark as to how much benefit or value destruction the three projects are responsible for. Things are far more encouraging in Vancouver, however, where three out of the five major transit projects undertaken or funded in recent years were backed by business cases showing a net benefit. Only one project did not show a net benefit and one project did not have a business case. Of course, business cases only make projections about net benefits. Rarely, if ever, do governments undertake an ex post review to determine whether their estimates were correct and if the project has delivered — or destroyed — the value expected. Given that these projects can run into the billions of dollars, tie up immense amounts of government resources, and can cause any number of disruptions to business and families, it is remarkable how little cost-benefit scrutiny is brought to bear on them. Without these ex post business cases, there can be no lessons learned from past projects. There can be no assurance that we can make better investment decisions going forward.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Iacobacci, 2017. "Business Cases for Major Public Infrastructure Projects in Canada," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 10(28), November.
    • Handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:10:y:2017:i:28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Public-Infrastructure-Projects-Iacobacci-final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glenn Jenkins & Chun-Yan Kuo & Arnold C. Harberger, 2011. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Investment Decisions: Chapter 4 (Discounting and Alternative Investment Criteria)," Development Discussion Papers 2011-04, JDI Executive Programs.
    2. Steven Robins, 2017. "Banking on Infrastructure: How the Canada Infrastructure Bank can Build Infrastructure Better for Canadians," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 483, June.
    3. Johnston, Robert J. & Rolfe, John & Zawojska, Ewa, 2018. "Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values: Progress, Prospects and Challenges," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 12(2-3), pages 177-266, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2021. "Testing structural benefit transfer: The role of income inequality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Guthrie, R. & Purse, Kevin & Lurie, P., 2006. "Workers' Compensation Western Australia; a Case Study 1993 - 2004," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 32(1), pages 62-73.
    3. Emile Noël, 1996. "Quelques réflexions sur les perspectives politico-institutionnelles de l'intégration européenne en 2000 et au-delà," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 39, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    4. Karin Fierke & Antje Wiener, 1999. "Constructing Institutional Interests: EU and NATO Enlargement," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 14, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    5. Leslie Holmes, 1997. "The Democratic State or State Democracy? Problems of Post-Communist Transition," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 48, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    6. Hermine Vedogbeton & Robert J. Johnston, 2020. "Commodity Consistent Meta-Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 835-865, April.
    7. Rodriguez Iglesias, 1996. "Le pouvoir judiciaire de la Communauté européenne au stade actuel de l'évolution de l'Union," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 41, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    8. Ewa Zawojska & Zbigniew Szkop & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Tomasz Żylicz, 2016. "Economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by the Wilanów Park: A benefit transfer study," Working Papers 2016-31, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    9. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    10. Nelson, Jon Paul, 2020. "Fixed-effect versus random-effects meta-analysis in economics: A study of pass-through rates for alcohol beverage excise taxes," Economics Discussion Papers 2020-1, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    11. Natalia Vasilenko & Marck Khaykin & Natalia Kirsanova & Arunas Lapinskas & Larisa Makhova, 2020. "Issues for Development of Economic System for Subsurface Resource Management in Russia through Lens of Economic Process Servitization," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(1), pages 44-48.
    12. Andre Liebich, 1998. "Ethnic Minorities and Long-Term Implications of EU Enlargement," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 49, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    13. Waldemar Bojar & Wojciech Żarski & Renata Kuśmierek-Tomaszewska & Jacek Żarski & Piotr Baranowski & Jaromir Krzyszczak & Krzysztof Lamorski & Cezary Sławiński & Konstadinos Mattas & Christos Staboulis, 2023. "A Comprehensive Approach to Assess the Impact of Agricultural Production Factors on Selected Ecosystem Services in Poland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, August.
    14. Sloane, Peter J, 2010. "Symposium 7: The Fair Work Australia Minimum Wage Decision Viewed From Afar," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 36(3), pages 346-350.
    15. Diluiso, Francesca & Guastella, Gianni & Pareglio, Stefano, 2021. "Changes in urban green spaces’ value perception: A meta-analytic benefit transfer function for European cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    16. Smith, M, 2009. "Gender Pay Equity Reform in Australia: What is the Way Forward?," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 35(4), pages 652-670.
    17. Eckard Rehbinder, 1997. "Environmental Agreements. A New Instrument of Environmental Policy," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 45, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    18. Keating, Jack, 2009. "Current VET strategies and responsiveness to emerging skills shortages and surpluses," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 35(3), pages 488-527.
    19. Townsend, K. & Charles, M.B., 2008. "Jarhead and Deskilling in the Military: Potential Implications for the Australian Labour Market," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 34(1), pages 64-78.
    20. Jackson, N. & Walter, M., 2010. "Which of Australia's Baby Boomers Expect to Delay their Retirement? An Occupational Overview," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 36(1), pages 29-83.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:10:y:2017:i:28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bev Dahlby (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spcalca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.