improving decision-making for mega … · improving decision-making for . mega transport...

STAREBEI Programme

IMPROVING DECISION-MAKING FOR MEGA TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

Study on the Potential Application of Policy-Led Multi-Criteria Analysis (PLMCA) to Appraisal of Major Gateway Seaport Projects

Luxembourg 3rd June 2015

Researcher: Marco Dean, OMEGA Centre, Bartlett School of Planning, University College London

University Supervisor: Prof Harry T. Dimitriou, Director OMEGA Centre, BSP, UCL EIB Supervisor: Dr J. Doramas Jorge Calderon, Senior Economist, EIB

http://www.google.it/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=8EgG59tjbJVAWM&tbnid=loafInzVdMwAvM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.logoeps.net/tag/universal-bank&ei=XamyU96cE4KV7AbbjICoBA&bvm=bv.69837884,d.ZGU&psig=AFQjCNHh_lkjDtB6U9XSdGCtvqmFy_s5Kg&ust=1404304091113446

Overview of Study Focus of Study Main Working Hypotheses Research Questions Research Methodology

Policy-Led Multi-Criteria Analysis (PLMCA) Main Features of PLMCA The Generic PLMCA Process

Case Study: Rotterdam Mainport Development (PMR) Programme The Decision-Making Process Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme

Main Findings Answers to Main Research Questions Final Observations

2

Content of Presentation

3

Overview of Study

This Study has focused on mega transport infrastructure projects and on gateway seaport projects located in major seaport cities.

For the purpose of this study mega infrastructure projects have been defined as extremely large-scale investment projects, typically costing more than US$ 1 billion, presenting usually long development cycles (in some cases even several decades), involving multiple (public and private) stakeholders, and generating substantial (direct and indirect) effects on communities, environments, and budgets (UMUC & FHWA, 2004; Flyvbjerg, 2014).

Mega infrastructure transport projects have been defined as major bridges and tunnels, large-scale road and railroad links, freight and passenger terminals (airports, seaports and railway termini/stations) or a combination of such projects costing in excess of US1 billion (OMEGA Centre, 2011 and 2012).

Focus and Aims of Study

4

Gateway seaport projects consist of : multiple specialized port

terminals; logistic parks located in

proximity of the seaports; inter-modal terminals situated

several hundred kilometers away from the coastline;

road, rail and also inland waterway corridors and pipelines (Notteboom and Rodrigue, 2005).

(Source: Notteboom and Rodrigue, 2005)

Overview of the Study

Focus and Aim of the Study

5

This study has attempted to examine the applicability of Policy-Led Multi-criteria Analysis (PLMCA) to the appraisal of international gateway seaport projects.

Multi-Criteria Analysis is an umbrella term used to describe a series of formal approaches which assist decision makers in taking explicit account of multiple criteria in moving toward a solution (Belton and Steward, 2002).

PLMCA is defined here as a framework plus attendant processes

that allow the inclusion in the appraisal process of multi-stakeholder’ and multi-sector perspectives, in line with policy guidelines with the view to facilitating the trade-offs made among decision-makers in achieving key objectives entailed by complex planning problems (Dimitriou, 2015).


Focus and Aim of the Study

6

This study has been based on two fundamental working hypotheses

Gateway port projects in major seaport cities should be considered as complex projects since they are constituted by multiple interdependent and interrelated subsystems, produce multiple economic, social and environmental impacts and affect (or are affected by) a number of different actors and groups.

Traditional planning and appraisal methodologies are often seen as insufficiently holistic for the assessment of such projects


Main Working Hypotheses

7

This study has attempted to address two main questions

To what extent can the use of PLMCA improve the overall appraisal process of mega infrastructure seaport projects for global gateway port cities?

To what extent can the results of a project appraisal exercise for a gateway port project, obtained through CBA, EIA and other common appraisal methodologies, be enhanced by the use of PLMCA?


Research Questions

8


Research Methodology

9

PLMCA is a framework plus attendant processes that allow the inclusion in the appraisal process of multi-stakeholder’ and multi-sector perspectives, in accordance with policy guidance with a view to facilitating the making of necessary trade-off in the decision-making process among key objectives entailed by complex planning problems (Dimitriou, 2015)

The development of PLMCA has been informed both by extensive research and by lessons and findings of the OMEGA Centre regarding the planning and appraisal of mega transport projects.

PLMCA aims at addressing a number of limitations associated with the application of more narrow decision-making and project appraisal approaches, simultaneously looking to overcome some shortcomings of other MCA methodologies.

Policy-Led Multi-Criteria Analysis (PLMCA)

Main Features of PLMCA

10

In PLMCA the key appraisal criteria by which a given project is assessed reflect the objectives of several policies whose areas are deemed pertinent with the general purpose of the given programme or project.



11

In PLMCA public policy and government plans and guidelines (as well as time, budget constraints) define much of the boundaries of the appraisal decision-making space within which stakeholder trade-offs can ultimately take place.



12

PLMCA assists the construction of a 'knowledge platform' where information, experiences and metrics from various sectors, disciplines and stakeholders, as well as results of different past appraisal practices as a basis for deciding among options. It also looks to incorporate the findings of other appraisal methods as they inform different aspect of the problematic.



13

While PLMCA builds on the classic multi-criteria framework and basic hierarchy of policies, objectives, criteria, scores and weights, it also benefits from the learning experience it brings to participating stakeholders.

PLMCA offers to the stakeholders the opportunity of: becoming

more aware about other stakeholders’ perspectives, rethinking an issue from a different standpoint, reframing problems and reconsidering their objectives and interests - with the view to building stakeholder alliances, consensus and perusing joint interests.



14

A PLMCA appraisal process consists of three key phases, including a number of different steps


The Generic PLMCA Process

15

In any PLMCA exercise four 4 groups of actors can be distinguished



16

Different tools and techniques can be adopted during the different steps of PLMCA exercise



17

The results of a PLMCA exercise are represented by a collection of ‘snap-shots’ taking a number of different forms including tables, graphs, charts and diagrams. Possible outputs comprise: performances of an option (or different options) according to the

viewpoint of different stakeholders; performances of an option (or different options) according to

different scenarios; and risks and opportunities entailed by each option under each

scenario.



18

Case Study: The PMR Programme

19

The PMR is a programme of public works (currently under development) which aims at both strengthening the competitiveness of the Port of Rotterdam and improving the quality of the living environment in the region. The programme comprises: expansion of the Port of Rotterdam through an artificial peninsula

(Maasvlakte II) which, following completion, will result in a 20% increase in the current port’s footprint;

the creation of a nature and recreation area of approximately 750 hectares in the Rotterdam region;

intensification projects to make the existing port and industrial areas more efficient.

The decision-making on this expansion project entailed a process of broad public participation. The final decision was informed by the results of a CBA exercise carried out for different possible scenarios of economic development as well as an EIA process investigating the effects of the project on the natural ecosystem.


The Decision-Making Process

20

The analysis of the decision-making process regarding the PMR Programme (based on the works of Klijn, 2003; Deelstraa et al., 2003; Kelly, 2005; Van Gils and Klijn, 2007; and Koppenol, 2012) has led to the identification of several (possible) shortcomings: the levels of openness which have characterized the different stages of the

process were not appropriate to a number of parties; The size of Maasvlakte II was justified by assuming arbitrarily an annual

GDP increase of +3%; environmental concerns proved to be very much secondary to the

promotion of port competitiveness; the results of the technical analyses supporting the final decision were not

all made publicly available and not sufficiently integrated into the decision-making process.


The Decision-Making Process

21

PHASE I: Problem identification and structuring - Establishment of the scope of the analysis & Analysis of the decision context


Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme

Actor: Appraisal Team Method: Interviews, Review of key documents

22



PHASE I: Problem identification and structuring - Identification of the client agency and the other key stakeholders

Client Agency

Key Project Stakeholders

Actor: Appraisal Team Method: Stakeholder Analysis

23

Case Study: The PMR Programme Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE I: Problem identification and structuring - Review of the relevant policy documents

Actor: Appraisal Team Method: Policy Analysis

24

Case Study: The PMR Programme Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE II: Model building - Identification of key objectives and appraisal criteria

Actor: Expert Method: Brainstorming, Review of key documents

25



PHASE II: Model Building - Identification of the options to be appraised

Actor: Appraisal Team Method: Brainstorming, Workshops, Review of key documents

26


Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE III: Assessment - Construction of the performance profiles of the options

Actor: Experts Method: Forecassting techniques, Appraisal methodologies

27


Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE III: Assessment - Scoring and Weighting procedures

Actor: Stakeholders Method: Workshops

28




29


(Source: adapted from McDowalla and Eamesb,2007)

Stakeholder group 1 Stakeholder group 2



Criterion 1

Criterion 2

Criterion 3

Criterion 4

Criterion 5

Criterion 6

Criterion 7

Criterion 1

Criterion 2

Criterion 3

Criterion 4

Criterion 5

Criterion 6

Criterion 7

Criterion 1

Criterion 2

Criterion 3

Criterion 4

Criterion 5

Criterion 6

Criterion 7

Criterion 1

Criterion 2

Criterion 3

Criterion 4

Criterion 5

Criterion 6

Criterion 7

Criterion 1

Criterion 2

Criterion 3

Criterion 4

Criterion 5

Criterion 6

Criterion 7

Criterion 1

Criterion 2

Criterion 3

Criterion 4

Criterion 5

Criterion 6

Criterion 7

4 3 2 5



30




PHASE III: Assessment - Scoring and Weighting procedures under different scenarios

Contextual forces impacting on the proposed developments

Actor: Expert Method: Brainstorming, Review of key documents

31


Indicators related to the economic dimension of sustainability

Indicators related to the environmental dimension of sustainability

Indicators related to the institutional dimension of sustainability

Indicators related to the social dimension of sustainability

Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE III: Assessment - Scoring and Weighting procedures under different scenarios


32



Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE III: Assessment - Identification of risks and opportunities


33



Application of PLMCA to the PMR Programme PHASE III: Assessment - Examination of the results

34

Main Findings

Responses to Main Research Questions


Despite numerous constraints of the exercise and in some cases the rather simplistic assumptions employed, this study has highlighted the potential value of a PLMCA approach for coping with many of the multiple challenges encountered by mega infrastructure project appraisal, helping to arrive at more robust decisions, in so far as: PLMCA can be employed with the view to ‘opening up’ the process to a plurality of

groups and individuals. PLMCA attempts to make more explicit all the objectives, the related appraisal

criteria and their relative level of importance, thus allowing stakeholders to properly understand the nature and balance of all the factors and issues entailed by the decision-making process.

With PLMCA all the parameters of the analysis are assessed are constructed an ultimately agreed collectively, through a series of workshops and panel discussions bringing together experts and stakeholders.

the outcomes of the PLMCA exercise can complement and integrate the results of conventional appraisal methodologies, thus making them more comprehensible to non-technical stakeholders.

35

Main findings

Final Observations


It should be noted that: While offering a more holistic platform for decision-making regarding mega

infrastructure projects, PLMCA cannot (and should not) be considered a panacea for all mega infrastructure project appraisal challenges.

Future refinements and developments of the PLMCA approach will emerge as its practice expand and reflects different contexts.

PLMCA requires a suitable and sustainable institutional, policy and legislative support measures plus database information systems to both inform the more holistic decision-making process pursued.

36 (Source: adapted from McDowalla and Eamesb,2007)

THANK YOU

improving decision-making for mega … · improving decision-making for . mega transport...

Documents