• français
    • English
  • English 
    • français
    • English
  • Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
BIRD Home

Browse

This CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals BIRDResearch centres & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Limitations of cost benefit analysis to support public debate: the case of public transportation decision-making in France

Thumbnail
Date
2007
Publisher city
Paris
Publisher
Cahier du LAMSADE
Publishing date
2007
Collection title
Cahier du LAMSADE
Link to item file
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00176115
Dewey
Recherche opérationnelle
Sujet
Cost benefit analysis; stakeholders participation; transportation decision-making process; concertation; processus de décision publique de transport; Analyse coûts avantages; parties prenantes
URI
https://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/4406
Collections
  • LAMSADE : Publications
Metadata
Show full item record
Author
Damart, Sébastien
Roy, Bernard
Type
Document de travail / Working paper
Item number of pages
38
Abstract (FR)
L'analyse coûts avantages est un outil d'évaluation des impacts potentiels des choix d'investissements publics. Dans de nombreux pays, en particulier la France, il est notamment mobilisé dans le cadre de processus de décision publique portant sur les investissements en infrastructures de transport. Dans les contextes de ressources publiques contraintes, la prise en compte des effets multiples de projets d'infrastructures de transport se pose sous forme d'un problème double. D'un côté, le décideur public doit gérer de la meilleure façon possible ses ressources, limitées. De l'autre côté, quand le décideur public choisit parmi différentes alternatives, il est amené à révéler un ordre de priorité qu'il a implicitement posé entre la satisfaction de différents intérêts, et cet ordre doit être perçu comme légitime. Le cas français illustre la difficulté de trouver un équilibre satisfaisant entre les connaissances experts produites par les méthodes d'ACA et les connaissances que dégage la participation des acteurs parties prenantes au cours du processus de décision. S'appuyant sur l'étude de la façon dont les institutions françaises font usage de l'ACA, cet article a pour but d'explorer comment l'utilisation des méthodes d'ACA interagit avec la pratique du débat public en France Aujourd'hui. Abstract: Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is a tool used to evaluate the potential socio-economic impact of public investment choices. In many countries, particularly in France, this tool is used to support decision-making related to transportation infrastructure. In the context of questionable budgetary arbitrations, taking the multiple effects of the different choices into account makes choosing among transport infrastructure investments is a two-fold problem. On the one hand, public decision-makers have limited resources that they must use in the best way possible. On the other hand, when choosing among alternative investment projects, the decision-makers reveal the priority they have assigned to the different stakes, and these priorities must be perceived as legitimate. The French case illustrates the difficulty of striking the right balance between the expert knowledge produced by CBA methods and what is induced by the participation of various stakeholders to the decision making process. Based on a study of how French institutions make use of the CBA method, this paper aims at examining how the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) interacts with the practice of public debate and stakeholder participation in France today.
Abstract (EN)
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is a tool used to evaluate the potential socio-economic impact of public investment choices. In many countries, particularly in France, this tool is used to support decision-making related to transportation infrastructure.In the context of questionable budgetary arbitrations, taking the multiple effects of the different choices into account makes choosing among transport infrastructure investments is a two-fold problem. On the one hand, public decision-makers have limited resources that they must use in the best way possible. On the other hand, when choosing among alternative investment projects, the decision-makers reveal the priority they have assigned to the different stakes, and these priorities must be perceived as legitimate. The French case illustrates the difficulty of striking the right balance between the expert knowledge produced by CBA methods and what is induced by the participation of various stakeholders to the decision making process. Based on a study of how French institutions make use of the CBA method, this paper aims at examining how the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) interacts with the practice of public debate and stakeholder participation in France today.

  • Accueil Bibliothèque
  • Site de l'Université Paris-Dauphine
  • Contact
SCD Paris Dauphine - Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny 75775 Paris Cedex 16

 Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons 2.0 France (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) license.