Benefit-cost analysis of variable pricing projects: QuickRide HOT lanes

被引:16
作者
Burris, M
Sullivan, E
机构
[1] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Civil Engn, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[2] Calif Polytech State Univ San Luis Obispo, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2006)132:3(183)
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Researchers identified a potential methodology for obtaining the incremental societal costs and benefits from a variable pricing project and applied that methodology to the QuickRide high occupancy/toll (HOT) lanes in Texas. This is one of the longest running variable pricing projects in the United States and, as such, it provided useful historical data and trends upon which to estimate future benefits and costs. This analysis found that the incremental societal benefits of QuickRide exceeded incremental societal costs for the time period considered. A companion paper that used the same methodology to examine the benefits and costs of the SR-91 Express Lanes found similar results. However, the differences between the benefits and costs were dramatically different for the two projects, indicative of the relative size of the two projects and the number of travelers impacted. On SR-91, tens of thousands of travelers were impacted on a daily basis where QuickRide's impact was limited to approximately 400 travelers per day. Interestingly, the benefit-cost ratios of the two projects were similar, both between 1.5 and 1.7.
引用
收藏
页码:183 / 190
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] CONVENTION AND LIMITATION IN BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
    HAMMOND, RJ
    NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL, 1966, 6 (02) : 195 - 222
  • [32] How (Not) to Lie with Benefit-Cost Analysis
    Farrow, Scott
    ECONOMISTS VOICE, 2013, 10 (01): : 45 - 50
  • [33] IMPROVING ACCURACY OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
    BORDMAN, SL
    IEEE SPECTRUM, 1973, 10 (09) : 72 - 76
  • [34] A fuzzy multicriteria benefit-cost approach for irrigation projects evaluation
    Anagnostopoulos, K. P.
    Petalas, C.
    AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2011, 98 (09) : 1409 - 1416
  • [35] The Consent Justification for Benefit-Cost Analysis
    Zerbe, Richard O.
    JOURNAL OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS, 2020, 11 (02) : 319 - 340
  • [36] REPEAL OF PROHIBITION: A BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
    Vitaliano, Donald F.
    CONTEMPORARY ECONOMIC POLICY, 2015, 33 (01) : 44 - 55
  • [37] DISTRIBUTION AND EFFICIENCY IN BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
    NEENAN, WB
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1971, 4 (02): : 216 - 224
  • [38] Benefit-Cost Analysis for Climate Action
    Bureau, Dominique
    Quinet, Alain
    Schubert, Katheline
    JOURNAL OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS, 2021, 12 (03) : 494 - 517
  • [39] Benefit-cost analysis and the environment - Response
    Arrow, KJ
    Cropper, ML
    Eads, GC
    Hahn, RW
    Lave, LB
    Noll, RG
    Portney, PR
    Russell, M
    Schmalensee, R
    Smith, VK
    Stavins, RN
    SCIENCE, 1996, 272 (5268) : 1572 - 1573
  • [40] Benefit-cost analysis in public health
    Lave, LB
    Joshi, SV
    ANNUAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1996, 17 : 203 - 219