scholarly journals Design of Functional Safety for Process Automation by Considering the Justification of Cost - Benefit Using ALARP Evaluation Method

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teerawat Thepmanee ◽  
Pornpatchara Khamkoon
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Functional Safety ◽  
Process Automation

How can multi-criteria analysis support deliberative spatial planning? A critical review of methods and participatory frameworks

Evaluation ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 135638902110203
Author(s):  
Geert te Boveldt ◽  
Imre Keseru ◽  
Cathy Macharis
Keyword(s):  
Critical Review ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Learning Tools ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
Multi Criteria Analysis

In spatial planning, the paradigm has shifted from positivist to deliberative approaches. Still, cost–benefit analysis remains the dominant evaluation method. Multi-criteria analysis is arguably more appropriate, as it allows for stakeholder participation. While there are dozens of ever more sophisticated multi-criteria analysis methods, their practicality as real-world learning tools has received little attention. The goal of this article is to assess the suitability of different multi-criteria analysis methods for deliberative planning. It presents a critical review of the logical-mathematical cores of the principal methods but also of the different participatory frameworks within which they can be applied. While mathematically sophisticated methods are valuable in well-defined problems with precise data available, we conclude that in the participatory and politically sensitive stages of the planning process, user-friendly and transparent methods are more appropriate and recommend the development of a method that supports the incremental improvement of design options rather than ranking alternatives.

scholarly journals What Is the Best Practice Method for Quantifying the Health and Economic Benefits of Active Transport?

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (17) ◽  
pp. 6186
Author(s):  
Holger Möller ◽  
Fiona Haigh ◽  
Rema Hayek ◽  
Lennert Veerman
Keyword(s):  
Active Transport ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Health Sector ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Road Transport ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Practice Method

The aim of this study was to identify a best practice method to cost the health benefits of active transport for use in infrastructure planning in New South Wales, Australia. We systematically reviewed the international literature covering the concept areas of active transport and cost and health benefits. Original publications describing a method to cost the health benefits of active transport, published in 2000–2019 were included. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against criteria identified in interviews with key government stakeholders. A total of 2993 studies were identified, 53 were assessed for eligibility, and 19 were included in the review. The most commonly studied active transport modes were cycling (n = 8) and walking and cycling (n = 6). Exposures considered were physical activity, road transport related injuries and air pollution. The most often applied economic evaluation method was cost benefit analysis (n = 8), and costs were commonly calculated by monetising health outcomes. Based on evaluation of models against the criteria, a Multistate Life Table model was recommended as the best method currently available. There is strong and increasing interest in quantifying and costing the health benefits of active transport internationally. Incorporating health-related economic benefits into existing regulatory processes such as cost benefit analyses could provide an effective way to encourage the non-health sector to include health impacts in infrastructure measures.

On the evaluation of public goods: cognitive and emotional aspects

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolao Bonini ◽  
Ilana Ritov ◽  
Michele Graffeo
Keyword(s):  
Public Goods ◽  
Public Good ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Subjective Evaluation ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Social Implications ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Subjective Value ◽  
Emotional Aspects

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretical framework for the assessment of subjective value of public goods. Public goods are not traded, so they do not have market prices, even if they may be of great importance for the well-being of citizens (e.g. green spaces, urban air). A procedure used to estimate the economic value of a public good is the contingent evaluation method: people are asked to state how much they are willing to pay to preserve or restore a public good. Many studies report that the subjective evaluation of public goods is affected by factors that, according to standard economics, should be irrelevant, such as the manipulation of frame and prime. On the other hand, factors that should be relevant, such as the magnitude of the expected benefit, are neglected. It appears that the evaluation of a public good cannot be reduced to a mere cost–benefit tradeoff evaluation. On the contrary, it seems that the subjective value of a public good is constructed. The authors argue that to accurately predict and describe how people valuate public goods, it is fundamental to study how people construct the associated mental representation. Design/methodology/approach – This paper takes into account the cognitive and emotional aspects of the evaluation of public goods. Findings – Subjective valuation of public goods is affected by irrelevant factors and is not affected by relevant factors. Practical implications – This paper provides an accurate description and prediction of how people evaluate public goods. Social implications – The social implications of this paper include a better evaluation of public policies. Originality/value – This paper is an original psychological perspective on the evaluation of public goods.

scholarly journals VALUASI EKONOMI SUMBERDAYA MANGROVE DI KELURAHAN MANGUNHARJO, KECAMATAN TUGU, KOTA SEMARANG Economic Valuation of Mangrove Resources in the Mangunharjo Village Tugu Sub District, Semarang City

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Desti Setiyowati ◽  
Supriharyono Supriharyono ◽  
Imam Triarso
Keyword(s):  
Random Sampling ◽  
Mangrove Forest ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Economic Valuation ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Use Value ◽  
Mangrove Forests ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Mangrove Resources

ABSTRAK Hutan mangrove merupakan salah satu sumberdaya yang memiliki fungsi dan peran penting dalam satu kesatuan ekosistem. Keberadaannya mendapat tekanan yang serius sebagai dampak dari konversi lahan untuk budidaya tambak intensif dan abrasi gelombang laut. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi pemanfaatan sumberdaya mangrove,menganalisis valuasi ekonomi total (TEV) sumberdaya mangrove setelah dikonversi menjadi tambak, dan menganalisis nilai manfaat sumberdaya mangrove. Metode penelitian menggunakan metode proportional stratified random sampling. Metode analisis yang digunakan adalah metode identifikasi pemanfaatan sumberdaya mangrove, metode identifikasi manfaat dan fungsiekosistem mangrove, dan metode evaluasi kebijakan sumberdaya mangrove dengan menggunakan Analisis Manfaat Biaya. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pemanfaatan sumberdaya mangrove yang dilakukan masyarakat lokal: perikanan tangkap ikan belanak, perikanan budidaya/tambak ikan bandeng dan udang windu, pembibitan mangrove, dan buah mangrove. Nilai ekonomi total sumberdaya mangrove di Kelurahan Mangunharjo saat ini seluas 7,1 ha ekosistem mangrove dan 75 ha tambak produktif sebesar Rp1.398.787.140 / tahun atau Rp160.480.161 / ha / tahun. Nilai manfaat sumberdaya mangrove yang tertinggi yaitu manfaat tidak langsung 63,77% (Rp892.000.000 / tahun atau Rp125.633.803 /Ha /tahun), nilai manfaat lainnya adalah manfaat langsung 33,30% (Rp465.739.500 /tahun atau Rp29.065.000 /ha /tahun), manfaat keberadaan 2,87% (Rp40.136.000 /tahun atau Rp5.652.958 /Ha /tahun), dan manfaat pilihan 0,07% (Rp911.640 / tahun atau Rp128.400 /ha /tahun). Kata kunci: sumberdaya, mangrove, konversi, manfaat, valuasi ekonomi ABSTRACT Mangrove forest is one resource that has function and role in the ecosystems. Mangrove forests in Mangunharjo Village are under increasing pressures as the impact of land conversion for intensive aquaculture and ocean wave abrasion. The aim of this research was to 1)identify the utilization ofmangrove resource, 2) analyze the value of the total economic (TEV) resources after mangrove converted into ponds,and 3) analyze the value of the benefits of mangrove resources. The method applied in the research was a purposive random sampling proportional to get representative respondents. Data were analyzed with several methods of analysis:a methodof resource utilization of mangrove identification, methods of identifying the benefits and functions of mangrove ecosystems, and mangrove resource policy evaluation method using Cost Benefit Analysis. This research results showed that the utilization of mangrove resources by local people is mullet fishing, aquaculture/ponds milkfish and shrimp, mangrove seeds, and mangrove fruits.The total economic value of mangrove resources in the Mangunharjo Village currently covering 7,1 ha of mangrove forest and 75 ha for the ponds that is still productive for IDR 1398787140 per year or IDR 160480161 /ha / year.Value of the benefits of mangrove resources is the highest 63,77% indirect use value (IDR 892000000 /year or 125633803 /ha /year), the value of other benefits are the direct use value of 33,30% (IDR 465739500 /year or IDR 29065000 /ha /year), the existence use value of 2,87% (IDR 40136000 /year or 5652958 /ha /year), and option use value of 0,07% (IDR 911640 /year or128400 /ha /year).  Keywords: resources, mangrove, conversion, benefits, economic valuatio

scholarly journals A Sustainable Evaluation Processes for Investments in the Transport Sector: A Combined Multi-Criteria and Cost–Benefit Analysis for a New Highway in Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (23) ◽  
pp. 9854
Author(s):  
Ilaria Henke ◽  
Armando Cartenì ◽  
Luigi Di Francesco
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Evaluation Methods ◽  
Transport Sector ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Design Alternatives ◽  
Sustainable Evaluation

In the transport sector, a rational and shared planning process is commonly based on the comparison of different design alternatives through quantitative evaluations and stakeholders’ engagement. Among the most adopted evaluation methods, there are cost–benefit analysis (CBA) and multi-criteria analysis (MCA). Both these methods have strengths and weaknesses, which do not allow the conclusion that one technique is dominant over the other. Starting from these considerations, the aim of this paper is to propose a sustainable evaluation process for investments in the transport sector, based on the combined use of both CBA and MCA analysis and a stakeholders’ engagement. The proposed evaluation method was also applied to a real case study: the decision-making process for a new highway in a high naturalistic and touristic area in north of Italy. Furthermore, a “weighted criteria process definition” based on the Delphi method was also performed within a public engagement process. Research results show that the application of both the evaluation analyses (CBA and MCA) allows the selection of the most rational althernative from a sustainable, shared and technical point of view. Precisely, the estimations performed underline that the CBA analysis significantly underestimated the non-users’ benefits, while the opposite occurred for the MCA analysis. The incidence of the non-users’ benefits is only the 14% of the total for the CBA, while it reaches more than the 79% for the MCA. This result is very relevant underling how, for a decision-making processes aimed in comparing different design alternatives for which non-users impacts are expected as relevant against the users ones, the unique application of the most consolidated CBA analyses are not always adequate, while the joint use of the two evaluation methods ensures robust and rational choices for a sustainable development.

Simulationsbasierte Bewertung von Weiterbildungen*/Simulation-based evaluation of further education - Potential of a company-specific approach for cost-benefit-analysis of training programs

2016 ◽  
Vol 106 (04) ◽  
pp. 282-287
Author(s):  
M. Merwart ◽  
B. Prof. Denkena ◽  
M. A. Dittrich
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Further Education ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Specific Calculation ◽  
Planning And Control ◽  
Simulation Based ◽  
And Control ◽  
A Company

Eine Umfrage des IFW zeigt, dass nur ein kleiner Anteil mittelständischer Unternehmen Weiterbildungsangebote in hohem Umfang nutzt. Eine Ursache ist, dass die Entscheidungsträger Weiterbildungsbedarfe und -erfolge meist nur qualitativ durch Interviews bestimmen. Für die betriebsspezifische Kalkulation des Nutzens wird am IFW eine quantitative Bewertungsmethode entwickelt. Ein Beispiel in diesem Artikel zeigt, wie auf Basis von Kennzahlen der Produktionsplanung und -steuerung Weiterbildungsstrategien betriebsspezifische Nutzenwerte zugeordnet werden.   A survey by the IFW shows that only a small percentage of SMEs use advanced trainings to a high extend. One reason is that decision makers determine training needs and successes only qualitatively by interviews. Therefore, the IFW develops a quantitative evaluation method for the company-specific calculation. Based on indicators from production planning and control this article shows an example how company-specific benefits of training strategies are determined.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document