Application of System Dynamics to Evaluate the Social and Economic Benefits of Infrastructure Projects
AbstractCost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is often employed to inform decision makers about the desirability of transport infrastructure investment options. One of the main limitations of traditional CBA approaches is that they do not provide a dynamic view that explicitly illustrates the cost and benefit relationships between component entities over time. This paper addresses this issue by describing a System Dynamics (SD) approach that can perform transport infrastructure CBA through the application of systems thinking to develop a causal-loop model that can subsequently be operationalised into an executable stock-and-flow model. Execution of this model readily enables sensitivity analysis of infrastructure investment options and visualisation of the cost-benefit behaviour of each variant over time. The utility of the approach is illustrated through a case study, the Co Chien Bridge project in Vietnam, using a model that incorporates conventional economic metrics and factors that measure indirect project benefits, such as impact on gross domestic product, unemployment rate, and total taxes gained from affected economic sectors. View Full-Text
Scifeed alert for new publicationsNever miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
- Get alerts for new papers matching your research
- Find out the new papers from selected authors
- Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
- Define your Scifeed now
Nguyen, T.; Cook, S.; Ireland, V. Application of System Dynamics to Evaluate the Social and Economic Benefits of Infrastructure Projects. Systems 2017, 5, 29.
Nguyen T, Cook S, Ireland V. Application of System Dynamics to Evaluate the Social and Economic Benefits of Infrastructure Projects. Systems. 2017; 5(2):29.Chicago/Turabian Style
Nguyen, Tiep; Cook, Stephen; Ireland, Vernon. 2017. "Application of System Dynamics to Evaluate the Social and Economic Benefits of Infrastructure Projects." Systems 5, no. 2: 29.
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.