nep-ppm New Economics Papers
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management
Issue of 2015‒05‒16
seven papers chosen by
Arvi Kuura
Tartu Ülikool

  1. Ranking Environmental Projects By Pannell, David J.
  2. Importance of stakeholder management in tourism project: case study of the Istra Inspirit project By Marko Perić; Jelena Đurkin; Ivanka Lamot
  3. Cofinancing in Environment and Development: Evidence from the Global Environment Facility By Matthew J. Kotchen; Neeraj Kumar Negi
  4. Program Evaluation and Spillover Effects By Angelucci, Manuela; Di Maro, Vincenzo
  5. Risk-adjusted Valuation of the Real Option to Invest By Carol Alexander; Xi Chen;
  6. Evaluating the impact of capacity building by ACIAR By Mullen, John; Gray, Doug; Meyer, Julien de
  7. Keeping an Eye on the Team: Developing an Observational Tool for Student Teams By Nausheen Pasha-Zaidi; Andrea Dallas; Jaby Mohammed; Wael El-Sokkary; Ameera Shoukry; Samira Fahmi

  1. By: Pannell, David J.
    Abstract: Environmental agencies and utilities wishing to support environmental projects face the challenge of deciding which of the many possible projects they should support with their limited resources. Projects vary greatly in their benefits and costs, so selecting the best projects can make a major difference to the level of benefits that can be generated for a given budget. Key principles for ranking projects are presented and explained. Suitable formulas to use as a metrics for ranking projects are developed and explained. The formulas account for valuation of benefits, the effectiveness of management, time lags, behaviour change, various risks and various costs. The formulas are designed to strike a balance between theoretical rigour and reasonable simplifications. A number of common mistakes to avoid are outlined. Sample templates for project proposals and spreadsheets for ranking projects are provided, to make it easy to put the principles into practice.
    Keywords: conservation, environment, investment, economics, project prioritisation, uncertainty, behaviour change, risk, valuation, technical feasibility, Environmental Economics and Policy, Resource /Energy Economics and Policy, D82, Q20, Q28,
    Date: 2015–04–16
  2. By: Marko Perić (Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Opatija, University of Rijeka, Croatia); Jelena Đurkin (Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Opatija, University of Rijeka, Croatia); Ivanka Lamot (Department for International Cooperation and EU Integration, Istria County, Pula, Croatia)
    Abstract: Purpose-To investigate the importance of inclusion of various local stakeholders in the implementation of tourism projects, focusing mainly on involvement in the organisation of activities and the distribution of benefits. Design-After a short review of the most important research on stakeholders and their role in tourism development, a case study of the cultural tourism Istra Inspirit project initiated by the Istria county, the Istria Tourist Board and the Istria Tourism Development Agency, is analysed. Methodology/Approach – A short literature review on stakeholder theory and its implementation in the field of tourism is the basis for the investigation of the described theoretical assumptions using a case study method. Case study analysis is oriented toward the involvement of various groups of stakeholders in the project implementation, their contribution and sharing financial and non- financial benefits from the project. Findings – Based on the case study analysis' results, efficient strategies for stakeholder involvement in the realisation of tourism projects have been identified and the importance of stakeholder management for the success of tourism projects has been confirmed. Originality – There are very few papers oriented toward the analysis of stakeholder involvement and the distribution of benefits on a particular case study of a tourism project initiated by the public sector.
    Keywords: Stakeholder management, tourism projects, local community, Istria
    JEL: L83
  3. By: Matthew J. Kotchen; Neeraj Kumar Negi
    Abstract: Leveraged cofinancing from public and private sources has emerged as a policy priority among international environment and development agencies. There is nevertheless surprisingly little research on the determinants and impacts of cofinancing for accomplishing environment and development goals. This paper contributes to the literature with a focus on three interrelated questions: (1) How does observed cofinancing depend on characteristics of the development project, the country where the project takes place, and the agencies responsible for project funding and execution? (2) What factors explain the likelihood that project cofinancing is based on loans rather than grants, and that cofinancing comes from the private sector rather than public agencies or non-governmental organizations? (3) Does greater cofinancing result in better environment and development projects? To answer these questions, we take advantage of data from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) on 3,269 projects from 1991 through the beginning of 2014. The results provide insight not only on how agencies may target cofinancing going forward, but also on how greater emphasis on cofinancing may implicitly shift environment and development priorities.
    JEL: Q01 Q2 Q54
    Date: 2015–05
  4. By: Angelucci, Manuela (University of Michigan); Di Maro, Vincenzo (Jobs Knowledge Platform and World Bank)
    Abstract: This paper is a practical guide for researchers and practitioners who want to understand spillover effects in program evaluation. The paper defines spillover effects and discusses why it is important to measure them. It explains how to design a field experiment to measure the average effects of the treatment on eligible and ineligible subjects for the program in the presence of spillover effects. In addition, the paper discusses the use of nonexperimental methods for estimating spillover effects when the experimental design is not a viable option. Evaluations that account for spillover effects should be designed such that they explain the cause of these effects and whom they affect. Such an evaluation design is necessary to avoid inappropriate policy recommendations and neglecting important mechanisms through which the program operates.
    Keywords: impact evaluation, spillover effects, field experiments, data collection, Indirect Treatment Effect, program mechanisms
    JEL: C93 C81 D62
    Date: 2015–04
  5. By: Carol Alexander (School of Business, Management and Economics, University of Sussex); Xi Chen (ICMA Centre, Henley Business School, University of Reading); (ICMA Centre, Henley Business School, University of Reading)
    Abstract: This paper resolves the conceptual ambiguity of real option value and derives a model using risk-adjusted discount rates that can be applied to value the option to invest in a project. The approach adopts stochastic revenue and costs which provide a general solution with the added virtue of applicability. We found the option value arises from the difference between an indi- vidual investor and the market in financing efficiency and risk preferences. Investors’ taking on idiosyncratic risks are crucial to obtaining the real option value; hedging project risks can significantly reduce the associated real option value.
    JEL: C44 D81 G11
    Date: 2014–12
  6. By: Mullen, John; Gray, Doug; Meyer, Julien de
    Abstract: Research funders like ACIAR typically invest in activities across a spectrum including human capacity building in pursuit of economic, social and environmental benefits. Ideally they allocate their resources such that the returns from these activities at the margin are similar but information about marginal returns is scarce. ACIAR has a strong record in estimating the impact of research leading to new technologies. There is much less experience in valuing research activities that add to human scientific capacity through either discrete training programs or the ‘learning by doing’ component of every research program. ACIAR commissioned Gordon and Chadwick (2007) to review the literature, devise an evaluation framework and apply their approach in two case studies. They partitioned an estimate of total welfare gains from a new technology between capacity building and research components, only qualitatively recognising ‘spillovers’ to later technology development. Here we review the literature in a research production framework, we assess the significance of capacity building activities within the total ACIAR program and we propose a tracer study of ACIAR trainees (Allwright Fellows) and partner institutions to develop an evidence based pathway from investment in ACIAR funded capacity building activities to identifiable specific changes in research outcomes.
    Keywords: Labor and Human Capital, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies,
    Date: 2015–02
  7. By: Nausheen Pasha-Zaidi (The Petroleum Institute); Andrea Dallas (The Petroleum Institute); Jaby Mohammed (The Petroleum Institute); Wael El-Sokkary (The Petroleum Institute); Ameera Shoukry (The Petroleum Institute); Samira Fahmi (The Petroleum Institute)
    Abstract: Teamwork is an essential component of the engineering design process. Engineers in today’s globalized economy must be able to work in multidisciplinary teams. As such, graduates of engineering programs must be able to apply their technical knowledge in team-based environments where flexibility, communication, and cooperation are needed to solve problems that do not necessarily have well-defined technical boundaries. The current study is part of an ongoing project addressing teamwork skills at the Petroleum Institute (PI), an engineering university in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Although a variety of soft skills, such as teamwork, communication, and project management are incorporated into the current curriculum at the PI, teamwork can be a particularly challenging soft skill to acquire and to teach. The quality of team experiences is dependent on team members’ perceptions of their group dynamics and the contributions that individuals make to the team. As students at the PI are segregated by gender (a common practice in government universities within the Gulf Arab region), the socio-cultural context provides a unique environment for the study of team dynamics. A number of tools are being used to investigate teamwork at the PI, including peer evaluations, student interviews, surveys, and teacher observations. However, in order to ascertain whether student teams are actually functioning in an effective manner (as compared to students’ perceptions of this phenomenon), it is important to specify the teamwork behaviors that are expected of effective teams. This is particularly relevant for student teams as the one of the goals should be to provide specific and measurable feedback to help students improve their performance. The present study provides insight into the development of an observational tool for identifying team behaviors among students at the PI. Although the project revolves around engineering students, the observation tool can be used to evaluate teamwork behaviors in any discipline. The tool adapts the competencies and behaviors of a computer-based peer feedback system known as Team Developer. The presentation will discuss the process involved in the development of the observational tool, its alignment to industry benchmarks, as well as the development of protocols and options for administering the behavioral instrument. The advantages and challenges of incorporating a behavioral assessment for teamwork will also be discussed.
    Keywords: teamwork behaviors, behavioral instrument development, student teams
    JEL: I23 I20 I29

This nep-ppm issue is ©2015 by Arvi Kuura. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.