nep-ppm New Economics Papers
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management
Issue of 2020‒08‒17
six papers chosen by
Arvi Kuura
Tartu Ülikool

  1. Retour réflexif d’un chercheur en sciences de gestion sur sa légitimité à investiguer le terrain de l’insertion By Elise Marcandella
  2. Monitoring in German bilateral development cooperation: A case study of agricultural, rural development and food security projects By Holzapfel, Sarah; Römling, Cornelia
  3. Understanding transport project appraisal in its institutional dimension By Chiara Pancotti; Matteo Pedralli; Geert Smit; Silvia Vignetti
  4. Using publicly available remote sensing products to evaluate REDD+ projects in Brazil By Gabriela Demarchi; Subervie Julie; Thibault Catry; Isabelle Tritsch
  5. Biodiversity Conservation in India: Mapping Key Sources and Quantum of Funds. By Pandey, Rita; Gupta, Manish; Sachdeva, Paavani; Singh, Abhishek
  6. Estimating the willingness to pay for urban esthetic projects using an inter-temporal equilibrium: a difference-in-differences hedonic approach By Kono, Tatsuhito; Sega, Kousuke; Seya, Hajime

  1. By: Elise Marcandella (CEREFIGE - Centre Européen de Recherche en Economie Financière et Gestion des Entreprises - UL - Université de Lorraine)
    Abstract: This article discusses the interest of interdisciplinarity in humanities and social sciences to address certain management issues. To illustrate this point, we describe a research-intervention, funded by a local authority, which have as target to facilitate the cooperation between all stakeholders in the field of social inclusion, including the beneficiaries, as part of the response to a call for projects launched by the State. First, we show how our approach to research, which we qualify as ethical, has led us to question our legitimacy, as a researcher in management sciences, to approach «people far from employment». Second, we explain how the creation of an interdisciplinary and interprofessional working collective, the PICOTE collective, enabled us to remove doubt about our legitimacy. We conclude on the importance of the researcher's reflective feedback on his practice in order to evolve it towards a better consideration of stakeholders and on the need to go towards a system for evaluating the quality of research considering its societal impacts.
    Abstract: Cet article traite de l'intérêt de l'interdisciplinarité en sciences humaines et sociales pour aborder certaines problématiques de gestion. Pour illustrer ce propos, nous faisons le récit d'une intervention, négociée avec une collectivité territoriale, visant à faciliter la coopération entre des acteurs de l'insertion et des bénéficiaires des dispositifs proposés par ces acteurs, dans le cadre de la réponse à un appel à projet lancé par l'État. Nous montrons comment notre approche de la recherche, que nous qualifions d'éthique, nous a amenée à nous questionner sur notre légitimité, en tant que chercheure en sciences de gestion, pour aborder les acteurs transversaux que sont les « publics éloignés de l'emploi » puis à créer un collectif de travail interdisciplinaire et interprofessionnel, le collectif PICOTE (Projets Innovants COllaboratifs TErritoriaux) pour lever ce doute sur notre légitimité. Nous concluons sur l'importance du retour réflexif du chercheur sur sa pratique pour faire évoluer celle-ci vers une meilleure prise en compte des parties prenantes et sur la nécessité d'aller vers un système d'évaluation de la qualité de la recherche prenant en compte ses impacts sociétaux.
    Keywords: Innovative collaborative project,Territory,Interdisciplinarity,Research ethics,Légitimité,Ehique en recherche,Interdisciplinarité,Territoire,Legitimacy,Projet innovant collaboratif
    Date: 2020–06–01
  2. By: Holzapfel, Sarah; Römling, Cornelia
    Abstract: Monitoring and evaluation have gained importance in recent decades in development cooperation to increase evidence, and thereby aid effectiveness. However, the focus on measuring results needs to be coordinated with other strategically important aspects of the aid and development effectiveness agenda, such as adapting to local needs and harmonisation among development actors. Combining these different goals remains a challenge in the development community. Studies show that most donors have similar problems when measuring results. The quality of the collected data can oftentimes be questioned because data collection methods lack methodological rigor. The data collected and used is often of limited relevance for the project. Reporting by implementing agencies to BMZ focusses more on accountability than on using the results for learning. This discussion paper offers an in-depth analysis of the efforts undertaken by German bilateral development cooperation actors to measure results and in how far the reported data can contribute to increase the effectiveness of development cooperation. Thirteen projects by German implementing agencies GIZ and KfW were selected and analysed by means of project documents and interviews with staff. In addition, general monitoring and evaluation guidelines of German development cooperation were consulted. The results show that BMZ does not have a comprehensive results-based management system in place for planning, monitoring and evaluation in German development cooperation, which leads to quality challenges with regard to the collected data. Many projects do not have a comprehensive theory of change, use methodologically contestable indicators and are not able to demonstrate causality between their activities and the results measured. Indicators are often selected with only the limited involvement of partner countries, and there are challenges with using partner countries' secondary data. BMZ has recently started a reform process with the aim of establishing a more comprehensive RBM system and providing additional guidance to projects on how to define indicators and measure results. The findings of this paper offer important lessons learnt and recommendations for the reform process.
    Date: 2020
  3. By: Chiara Pancotti (CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies); Matteo Pedralli (CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies); Geert Smit (Ecorys); Silvia Vignetti (CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies)
    Abstract: Despite extensive convergence on the methodologies for transport project appraisal, the actual performance of transport infrastructures frequently differs from ex-ante forecasts. Among the possible reasons for this discrepancy, there are technical and institutional aspects. Technical reasons point to lacking data, failure to identify effects generated by the project, impossibility to include certain effects in the analysis. Institutional ones include strategic misrepresentations by project promoters, absence of incentives for the private and public sector to avoid optimism bias and reveal true information about the project, path dependency. This paper adopts a conceptual framework for the analysis of transport project appraisal systems, based on relevant literature and illustrated through good practices from different countries and international organisations. The framework’s illustration highlights how an appropriate institutional setting is instrumental for the proper use of transport project appraisal and its performance. The paper argues that embedding transport project appraisal in a formalised institutional setting is important to ensuring more transparency in public investment decision making and reducing uncertainties stemming from arbitrary or biased decision processes. Further, a robust institutional setting can increase the solidity and comparability of appraisal results, as well as ensure that these results feed into the decision-making process.
    Keywords: Cost-Benefit analysis, project appraisal, transport project, decision-making process
    JEL: D61 H43 O18 R42 G11
    Date: 2020–07–01
  4. By: Gabriela Demarchi (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - FRE2010 - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement); Subervie Julie (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - FRE2010 - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement); Thibault Catry (UMR 228 Espace-Dev, Espace pour le développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - AU - Avignon Université - UR - Université de La Réunion - UM - Université de Montpellier - UG - Université de Guyane - UA - Université des Antilles); Isabelle Tritsch (UMR 228 Espace-Dev, Espace pour le développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - AU - Avignon Université - UR - Université de La Réunion - UM - Université de Montpellier - UG - Université de Guyane - UA - Université des Antilles)
    Abstract: The perpetuity and improvement of REDD+ projects for curbing deforestation require rigorous impact evaluations of the effectiveness of existing on-the-ground interventions. Today, a number of global and regional remote sensing (RS) products are publicly available for detecting changes in forest cover worldwide. In this study, we assess the suitability of using these readily available products to evaluate the impact of REDD+ local projects targeting smallholders (owning plots of less than 100 ha) in the Brazilian Amazon. Firstly, we reconstruct forest loss for the period between 2008 and 2017 of 17,066 farms located in the Transamazonian region, using data derived from two landcover change datasets: Global Forest Change (GFC) and Amazon Deforestation Monitoring Project (PRODES). Secondly, we evaluate the consistency between the two sources of data. Lastly, we estimate the long-term impact of a REDDÅ project using both RS products. Results suggest that the deforestation estimates from the two data-sets are statistically different and that GFC detects systematically higher rates of deforestation than PRODES. However, we estimate that an average of about 2 ha of forest were saved on each participating farm during the first years of the program regardless the source of data. These results suggest that these products may not be suitable for accurately monitoring and measuring deforestation at the farm-level, but they can be a useful source of data on impact assessment of forest conservation projects.
    Keywords: remote sensing products,deforestation,impact evaluation,Brazilian Amazon.,REDD+
    Date: 2020–07–13
  5. By: Pandey, Rita (National Institute of Public Finance and Policy); Gupta, Manish (National Institute of Public Finance and Policy); Sachdeva, Paavani (University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign); Singh, Abhishek (Fifteen Finance Commission)
    Abstract: India being a signatory to CBD is mandated to achieve biodiversity targets according to a time line, which requires a credible action plan, funds, and a smart implementation strategy. While India has a National Biodiversity Action Plan, it lacks a Biodiversity Finance Policy/Plan - key to identifying, current funds flow, periodic and continuous additional finance needs as well as resource mobilization strategies. Biodiversity finance in India, is highly fragmented, lacks a clear policy and a road map. Multiple institutions are involved in directing finance often with overlapping functions and no systematic tracking. While a couple of studies have attempted to map the sources and quantum of funds towards biodiversity conservation, there is no comprehensive estimate of total budgetary funding in India for this purpose. This paper not only fills this gap but also estimates the flow of funds from externally aided projects and from corporate sector through CSR and other compliance mandates. The paper uses a modified `Rio-marker' methodology and `Budgetary data on Actual Expenditure' on biodiversity in the analysis thus contributes to both theoretical and empirical literature on the subject. The analysis shows that the majority of BD management is through government Budget support, supplemented by externally aided projects, corporate sector, and Civil Society. The paper shows that a template for tracking and tagging biodiversity expenditure is necessary in institutionalizing this process and thus moving towards a credible biodiversity finance plan.
    Keywords: Biodiversity financing ; government expenditure ; sub-national governments ; Maharashtra ; India
    JEL: Q5
    Date: 2020–07
  6. By: Kono, Tatsuhito; Sega, Kousuke; Seya, Hajime
    Abstract: Based on an inter-temporal general equilibrium model, we rigorously derive a measurement method using dynamic changes in cross-sectional hedonic prices to estimate the willingness to pay for urban esthetic projects. The method has advantages in common with a difference-in-differences approach. For example, fewer attributes are used as explanatory variables than with a cross-sectional hedonic approach because fixed effects can be ignored. It can therefore mitigate problems related to omitted variables and multicollinearity, which are prevalent in cross-sectional hedonic approaches. Nevertheless, either the measurement or one additional assumption of marginal utility of income is necessary for provision of correct measures. In addition, we consider the existence of condominiums, which has not been supposed in conventional hedonic approaches but must always be considered in practical situations. We apply the method to utility line undergrounding projects.
    Keywords: project evaluation, amenities, willingness to pay, dynamic hedonic approach, difference in differences
    JEL: C1 R11 R13 R14 R52
    Date: 2020–07–25

This nep-ppm issue is ©2020 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.