nep-ppm New Economics Papers
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management
Issue of 2015‒10‒10
seven papers chosen by
Arvi Kuura
Tartu Ülikool

  2. Is it Worth the Effort? - A Decision Model to Evaluate Resource Interactions in IS Project Portfolios By Christian Meier; Dennis Kundisch; Jochen Willeke
  3. The Regulatory Asset Base Model and the Project Finance Model: A comparative analysis By Dejan Makovsek
  4. ID-RECCO, A new collaborative work tool to improve knowledge on redd+ projects: sources, methodology and data. By Gabriela Simonet; Coline Seyller
  5. Taxing Fragmented Aid to Improve Aid efficiency By Auriol, Emmanuelle; Miquel-Florensa, Josepa
  6. Ex-post Assessment of Transport Investments and Policy Interventions: Roundtable Summary and Conclusions By Tom Worsley
  7. Techno-Economic Assessment of Four CO2 Storage Sites By Jean-François Gruson; Sylvain Serbutoviez; Florence Delprat-Jannaud; Maxine Akhurst; C. Nielsen; F. Dalhoff; P. Bergmo; C. Bos; Valentina Volpi; S. Iacobellis

  1. By: Christian Meier (University of Paderborn)
    Abstract: In the literature, there is anecdotal as well as empirical evidence for the existence and the business impact of output interactions among information systems projects. While a lot of sophisticated optimization models have been suggested which already provide for the consideration of output interactions when selecting information systems project portfolios, the necessary data required for their application in business practice are usually not available to the planner. There is a lack of techniques in the literature on how to identify output interactions already at the time, a portfolio is planned. We attribute this lack to the rather semantical nature of output interactions. We contribute to filling the identified gap by conferring semantic clustering - a technique originating in the text mining literature - to the field of information systems project portfolio selection. A prototypical decision support system is developed that uses latent semantic analysis and hierarchical clustering to identify potential output interactions among information systems project proposals based on semantic similarities within their goal descriptions. This paper focuses on the design of the developed prototype and argues that latent semantic analysis represents a very promising technique for the identification of output interactions among information systems projects.
    Keywords: Information Systems, Project Portfolio Selection, Project Interactions, Latent Semantic Analysis, Semantic Clustering
    JEL: C44
    Date: 2015–06
  2. By: Christian Meier (University of Paderborn); Dennis Kundisch (University of Paderborn); Jochen Willeke (University of Paderborn)
    Abstract: The adequate consideration of resource interactions among IS projects is a challenging but important requirement within IS project portfolio selection. However, the literature is silent on potential techniques for the identification and assessment of resource interactions. Moreover, the literature has so far neglected the question of the trade-off between time and effort invested in identifying and evaluating resource interactions caused by resource sharing among projects, compared to the benefits derived from this exercise, and the extent to which it is worth doing so thoroughly. Hence, our contribution is twofold. First, we suggest a technique to support the identification and evaluation of potentially economically relevant resource interactions. Second, we propose a decision model that allows to calculate a theoretical upper bound for the amount of effort that should be invested in improving estimates for identified interactions as part of the portfolio planning process.
    Keywords: IS project portfolio selection, resource interactions, sensitivity analysis, identification, assessment, decision model
    JEL: C61
    Date: 2015–06
  3. By: Dejan Makovsek
    Date: 2015–02
  4. By: Gabriela Simonet; Coline Seyller
    Abstract: This paper describes the methodology and data used for the construction of a collaborative work tool focused on REDD+ projects and called ID-RECCO, which stands for ‘International Database on REDD+ Projects linking Economic, Carbon and Communities data’. ID-RECCO links 110 variables informing on several aspects of REDD+ projects: carbon certification, sources of financing, socio-economic expected impacts, project proponents and general features of the project. As of October 2014, we have collected data on 410 projects, 57 countries and 362 project proponents. This database is innovative in the sense it is the first time such a large amount of information is collected on REDD+ projects globally, in a format adequate for research purpose and analysis.The database will be available online by the end of 2015 to serve the REDD+ community. It will be particularly useful for researchers who work on REDD+ issues, but it will also constitute a unique learning unit for project proponents and governments who are implementing REDD+ actions at different scales.
    Keywords: REDD+ projects, Worldide, Database, Knowledge representation, Climate Change, Forests
    Date: 2015
  5. By: Auriol, Emmanuelle; Miquel-Florensa, Josepa
    Abstract: We present a model with two donors-principals that provide funds to a unique recipient-agent. Each donor decides how to allocate his aid funds between a pooled and a donor specific unilateral project. Both principals and the agent value the output produced with the principals' pooled and two unilateral funded projects. However the donors have a bias in favor of their own unilateral project, which leads them to over-invest in these projects. The agent establishes a tax on the unilateral projects, which acts as a protection measure against biased allocation by the principals. The optimal tax imposed by the recipient on unilateral projects varies depending on the total amount of aid provided by the donor and on the productivity of his unilateral project. We present empirical support on the donors' preferences for unilateral projects, and how allocations and fragmentation are affected by recipient's characteristics.
    Keywords: Aid fragmentation, incentives, multi-principal, Development
    JEL: D82 D86 F35 O19
    Date: 2015–08–31
  6. By: Tom Worsley
    Abstract: Ex-post evaluation can be used to serve multiple purposes at the core of which is the improvement of ex-ante analysis: - It can help policy-makers better identify the kinds of projects that work best in certain situations; - It can identify the effect of concurrent non-transportation investments and their interaction with transportation investments; - It can contribute to establishing the time frames in which we expect to see economic impacts materialize, thereby helping to set realistic expectations for the effect of investments and economic development; - We can make use of findings of ex-post assessments to support communication with the public, improve the information provided, and support consensus-building efforts
    Date: 2014–09
  7. By: Jean-François Gruson (IFPEN - IFP Energies Nouvelles - IFP Energies Nouvelles); Sylvain Serbutoviez (IFPEN - IFP Energies Nouvelles - IFP Energies Nouvelles); Florence Delprat-Jannaud (IFPEN - IFP Energies Nouvelles - IFP Energies Nouvelles); Maxine Akhurst (BGS - British Geological Survey - BGS); C. Nielsen (Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) - Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS)); F. Dalhoff (Vattenfall); P. Bergmo (SINTEF); C. Bos (TNO [Pays-Bas] - TNO); Valentina Volpi (OGS - Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica sperimentale - OGS); S. Iacobellis (ENEL)
    Abstract: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) should be a key technology in order to achieve a decline in the CO2 emissions intensity of the power sector and other intensive industry, but this potential deployment could be restricted by cost issues as the International Energy Agency (IEA) in their last projections (World Energy Outlook 2013) has considered only around 1% of global fossil fuel-fired power plants could be equipped with CCS by 2035. The SiteChar project funded by 7th Framework Programme of European Commission gives the opportunity to evaluate the most influential parameters of techno-economic evaluations of four feasible European projects for CO2 geological storage located onshore and offshore and related to aquifer storage or oil and gas reservoirs, at different stages of characterization. Four potential CO2 storage sites have been assessed in terms of storage costs per tonne of CO2 permanently stored (equivalent cost based). They are located offshore UK, onshore Denmark, offshore Norway and offshore Italy. The four SiteChar techno-economic evaluations confirm it is not possible to derive any meaningful average cost for a CO2 storage site. The results demonstrate that the structure of costs for a project is heterogeneous and the storage cost is consequently site dependent. The strategy of the site development is fundamental, the technical choices such as the timing, rate and duration of injection are also important. The way monitoring is managed, using observation wells and logging has a strong impact on the estimated monitoring costs. Options to lower monitoring costs, such as permanent surveys, exist and should be further investigated. Table 1 below summarizes the cost range in Euro per tonne (Discount Rate (DR) at 8%) for the different sites, which illustrates the various orders of magnitude due to the specificities of each site. These figures have how to be considered with care. In particular the Italian and Norwegian sites present very specific features that explain the high estimated costs. For the Italian site, the short duration of CO2 injection associated with a low injection rate makes the CO2 project comparable to a demo project. The Norwegian site is an offshore site located in a virgin area with high infrastructure costs and a combination of injection duration and injection rate that makes the derived costs very sensitive to the discount rate. The results for both UK and Danish sites confirm therefore the value range calculated by the European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP). The main uncertainties in the costs are linked both to the choice of economic parameters (e.g. injected quantities, contingencies) and to the technical choice of operations. This has been studied by sensitivity analyses: for example, if an injection rate is halved and the injection duration is doubled, the Equivalent Storage Cost (ESC) increases by 23% (UK case at 8% DR). Introducing a water production well and water treatment facilities also increases the ESC by 23%, at least on an onshore site. Techno-economic assessments were basically carried out using an 8% discount rate. For projects of long lifetime such a rate severely discounts the late cash flow, especially after 40 years, so that a discount rate of around 4% more in logic of public investment. Compared to other studies, it has to be noted that the scope of the SiteChar analysis does not consider compression and pumping cost, nor transportation cost. This simplifies the techno-economic evaluation but it may not adequately reflect the specific conditions of the individual developments and, hence, distort the comparison between different cases. Lastly, techno-economic evaluation poses questions to policy makers about the real lifetime of a CO2 storage project: what should be the abandon phase and the associated cost and what is the real value of the liability transfer after 20 years of storage? This issue is still an open question, which has been addressed in SiteChar assuming the same approach as ZEP (2011). To counterbalance these CO2 storage costs, policy makers have to set up incentives, either through ETS (Emission Trading System) credits, tax credits or public funding. To improve the commerciality of CCS, Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) should be taken into account in the regulation of CCS, as it is one of the rare sources for revenue from a commodity with a real market value. CO2 storage in a saline aquifer close to oil and gas fields could also be considered as a source for CO2 EOR.
    Keywords: Techno-economic assessments,CO2 injection,Well monitoring,CCS,Carbon capture and storage,Site evaluation,CO2 Emissions,Cost evaluation,Lifetime of a CO2 storage project
    Date: 2015

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.