The author discusses alternatives to cost benefit studies when assessing the benefits of road proposals. Mention is made of some of the disadvantages of cost benefit analysis, which include the difficulty of assessing the cost of factors such as death and it is pointed out that many schemes can show a benefit in terms of cost than can be paid for. It is argued that a priority assessment is more desirable than cost benefits and discusses a number of alternative ways of doing this. These include the degree of political incentive brought by public outcry which may sometimes be based on a false premise or may not be to the general advantage; professional intuition and experience; numbers of people affected; the number of accidents already occurring, which might lead to nothing being done where there is an obviously dangerous situation; and in terms of time saved and lost. This latter approach is put forward as being worth more detailed consideration because delays and congestion can be directly related to time both for car occupiers and pedestrians; because time factors in accidents related to time off from normal living (i.e. Include joie de vivre as well as work cost; and because fatal accidents can be related to age and normal life span. /TRRL/

  • Corporate Authors:

    IPC Building and Contract Journals Limited

    32 Southwark Bridge Road
    London SE1 9EX,   England 
  • Authors:
    • Baigent, N E
  • Publication Date: 1975-1-3

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00125120
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Source Agency: Transport and Road Research Laboratory (TRRL)
  • Files: ITRD, TRIS
  • Created Date: Nov 18 1975 12:00AM