A Methodological Framework for Prioritizing Infrastructure Investment

Policy makers are often confronted with a myriad of factors in the investment decision-making process. This issue is particularly acute in infrastructure investment decisions, as these often involve significant financial resources and lock-in technologies. In regions and countries where the infrastructure access gap is large and pubic budgets severely constrained, the importance of considering the different facets of the decision-making process becomes even more relevant. This paper discusses the trade-offs policy makers confront when attempting to prioritize infrastructure investments, in particular with regard to economic growth and welfare, and proposes a methodological framework for prioritizing infrastructure projects and portfolios that holistically equates such trade-offs, among others. The analysis suggests that it is not desirable to have a single methodology, providing a single ranking of infrastructure investments, because of the complexities of infrastructure investments. Rather, a multidisciplinary approach should be taken. Decision makers will also need to account for factors that are often not easily measured. While having techniques that enable logical frameworks in the decision-making process of establishing priorities is highly desirable, they are no substitute for consensus building and political negotiations.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andres, Luis, Biller, Dan, Herrera Dappe, Matias
Format: Working Paper biblioteca
Language:English
en_US
Published: World Bank, Washington, DC 2015-10
Subjects:SANITATION, GROWTH RATES, INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISION, WATER SERVICES, TRANSPORT SECTOR, PUBLIC UTILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE ASSETS, TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, ECONOMIC GROWTH, POWER PLANTS, INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES, FOSSIL FUELS, RAIL NETWORK, METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION, VALUATION, ECONOMIC WELFARE, LONG TERM INVESTMENTS, TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC SECTOR, VEHICLES, INDUSTRY, GENERATION, INFRASTRUCTURE REHABILITATION, TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH, ELASTICITY, INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, AGGLOMERATION EFFECTS, INVESTMENT PLANNING, GROWTH MODEL, ECONOMIC DYNAMICS, PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, AIRPORTS, INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR, WEALTH, MARKET ACCESS, ECONOMIC LOSS, TRANSPORT INVESTMENT, RENTS, ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE, OPEN ACCESS, ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS, MOTOR VEHICLES, VEHICLE, CAPITAL INTENSITY, ROAD, COSTS, ROAD NETWORK, ECONOMIC BENEFITS, TRANSPORT, PUBLIC FUNDS, PORT AUTHORITY, CONTRACTS, MOBILITY, PUBLIC SAFETY, OPTIONS, EXTERNALITIES, MARKETS, POLLUTION, INDICATORS, PUBLIC TRANSPORT, CLIMATE CHANGE, LARGE‐SCALE INFRASTRUCTURE, PORTS, RURAL ROADS, FUELS, POWER DISTRIBUTION, SUBSIDIES, FINANCE, PUBLIC INVESTMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE, INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT, DEMAND FOR INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT, TRANSMISSION LINES, INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY, TRANSPORTATION, TRANSIT, METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROJECTS, UTILITIES, POWER, TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT, RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE, TRANSPORTATION DECISION, ROAD PROJECTS, PUBLIC WORKS, INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, ECONOMICS, BRIDGE, ROADS, SPRAWL, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, SLUMS, HIGHWAY, RAILWAYS, EDUCATION, DISTRIBUTION GRID, STOCKS, INVESTMENT, STATISTICS, RAIL, SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE, INVESTMENTS, PRIVATE VEHICLE, INVESTMENT COSTS, TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, DIESEL, SAFETY, URBAN SPRAWL, INFRASTRUCTURES, AGGLOMERATION, PRICES, NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES, BOTTLENECKS, POOR HOUSEHOLDS,
Online Access:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2015/10/25124940/methodological-framework-prioritizing-infrastructure-investment
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/22855
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Policy makers are often confronted with a myriad of factors in the investment decision-making process. This issue is particularly acute in infrastructure investment decisions, as these often involve significant financial resources and lock-in technologies. In regions and countries where the infrastructure access gap is large and pubic budgets severely constrained, the importance of considering the different facets of the decision-making process becomes even more relevant. This paper discusses the trade-offs policy makers confront when attempting to prioritize infrastructure investments, in particular with regard to economic growth and welfare, and proposes a methodological framework for prioritizing infrastructure projects and portfolios that holistically equates such trade-offs, among others. The analysis suggests that it is not desirable to have a single methodology, providing a single ranking of infrastructure investments, because of the complexities of infrastructure investments. Rather, a multidisciplinary approach should be taken. Decision makers will also need to account for factors that are often not easily measured. While having techniques that enable logical frameworks in the decision-making process of establishing priorities is highly desirable, they are no substitute for consensus building and political negotiations.