An optimised multiple test framework for project selection in the public sector, with a nuclear waste disposal case-based example

被引:7
作者
Chapman, C.B. [1 ]
Ward, S.C. [1 ]
Klein, J.H. [1 ]
机构
[1] School of Management, University of Southampton, Southampton
关键词
Discounting; Generic project risk management processes; Investment appraisal; Nuclear waste disposal; Project selection; Public expenditure;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.02.008
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Since 1967 the real (net of inflation) discount rate used to assess public sector projects in the UK has changed four times: from 8% to a peak of 10%, then to 5%, then to 6%, and then to the current position of 3.5% for years 1-30 declining in increments to 1% by year 300. This paper argues that the trend is in the right direction, but the associated decision process remains inappropriate, because the rationale for the changes has been flawed. Many other countries use discount rates of 6% or more in decision processes which are probably even more inappropriate. The fundamental problem stems from attempts by economists to embed too many conflicting considerations in a discount rate which is used in a single hurdle rate test. A multiple test approach is needed to address all the issues that the associated decision processes need to consider. This paper offers a way forward based on alternative economics perspectives, operational research perspectives, and established practice in a project risk management context. A case-based example concerned with the disposal of intermediate level nuclear waste in the UK illustrates how it works, and the implications of current UK practice, suggesting a very different view of a decision a decade ago which is a topical again. The proposed framework should be of interest to anyone interested in public sector projects, in the UK and elsewhere, and its generalisation has implications for private sector projects and private public partnerships (PPPs). Generic project risk management processes concerned with the whole of the project life cycle could embed a generalised form. © 2006 Elsevier Ltd and IPMA.
引用
收藏
页码:373 / 384
页数:11
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
Tamiz M., Jones D., Romero C., Goal programming for decision making: An overview of the current state-of-the-art, Eur J Operat Res, 111, pp. 569-581, (1998)
[2]  
Ward S.C., Arguments for constructively simple models, J Operat Res Soc, 40, 20, pp. 141-153, (1989)
[3]  
Chapman C.B., Ward S.C., Managing project risk and uncertainty: A constructively simple approach to decision making, (2002)
[4]  
HM Treasury, The Green Book: appraisal and evaluation in Central Government, (2003)
[5]  
Hawkins C.J., Pearce D.W., Capital investment appraisal, Macmillan studies in economics, (1971)
[6]  
Kaldor N., Welfare propositions of economists and interpersonal comparisons of tility, The Economic Journal, 49, pp. 549-552, (1939)
[7]  
Hicks J.R., The valuation of the social income, Economica, 7, pp. 105-124, (1940)
[8]  
Arrow K., Social choice and individual values, (1951)
[9]  
Scott M., The test rate of discount and changes in base-level income in the United Kingdom, The Economic Journal, 87, pp. 219-241, (1977)
[10]  
Fieldstein M.S., The social time preference discount rate in cost benefit analysis, The Economic Journal, 74, pp. 360-379, (1964)