Contrasting the recommendations of participatory value evaluation and cost-benefit analysis in the context of urban mobility investments

Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE) is a new method to assess the desirability of government projects. In a PVE, individuals select their preferred portfolio of government projects given a constrained public budget. Individuals' preferences for (the impacts of) government projects can be determined based on these choices. The obtained preferences can be used to rank government projects in terms of their desirability. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is an alternative appraisal method used to assess the desirability of government projects. CBA establishes the desirability of public projects through analyzing people's trade-offs between their private income and impacts of public projects. The primary objective of this paper is to investigate whether CBA and PVE lead to different policy recommendations in the context of urban mobility investments. We conducted CBAs and a PVE for 16 urban mobility investment projects and find indicative evidence that projects which focus on improving traffic safety and improvements for cyclists/pedestrians rank higher in the PVE, whereas car projects rank higher in the CBA analysis.

Automated summary

Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE) and Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) are two methods used to assess the desirability of government projects. This study investigates whether these methods lead to different policy recommendations in the context of urban mobility investments. Findings suggest that projects focusing on traffic safety and improvements for cyclists/pedestrians rank higher in PVE, while car projects rank higher in CBA analysis.