Comparative analysis of evaluation techniques for transport policies

The objective of this paper is to examine and compare the use of a number of policy evaluation tools, which can be used to measure the impact of transport policies and programmes as part of a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) or sustainability appraisal. The evaluation tools that were examined include cost-benefit analysis (CBA), cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). It was concluded that both CEA and CBA are useful for estimating the costs and/or benefits associated with transport policies but are constrained by the difficulty in quantifying non-market impacts and monetising total costs and benefits.Furthermore, CEA is limited to identifying the most ‘cost-effective policy’ for achieving a single, narrowly defined objective, usually greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and is, therefore, not suitable for evaluating policy options with ancillary costs or a variety of potential benefits. Thus, CBA or CEA evaluation should be complemented by a complete environmental and socio-economic impact assessment approach such as MCDA. This method allows for participatory analysis and qualitative assessment but is subject to caveats such as subjectivity and value-laden judgments.