nep-ppm New Economics Papers
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management
Issue of 2023‒07‒31
six papers chosen by
Arvi Kuura
Tartu Ülikool
  1. Choose Your Moments: Peer Review and Scientific Risk Taking By Richard T. Carson; Joshua S. Graff Zivin; Jeffrey G. Shrader
  2. Integrating climate change in infrastructure project appraisal: A proposed methodology for Ireland By Marco Percoco; Ana Maria Ruiz Rivadeneira; Margaux Lelong; Ludovica Mager
  3. The simple answer to the Social Discount Rate question By Szekeres, Szabolcs
  4. How to measure the impact of culture, sports and business events: A guide, Part I By OECD
  5. Building spaces of interactions between researchers and managers By Thibaut Couturier; Sarah Bauduin; Guillelme Astruc; Aurélie Blanck; Coline Canonne; Thierry Chambert; Jules Chiffard; Alix Cosquer; Sarah Cubaynes; Laurence Curtet; Emmanuelle Dortel; Nolwenn Drouet‐hoguet; Christophe Duchamp; Charlotte Francesiaz; Oksana Grente; Adrien Jailloux; Maëlis Kervellec; Valentin Lauret; Jean‐dominique Lebreton; Julie Louvrier; Lucile Marescot; Raphaël Mathevet; Marie‐laure Navas; Charlotte Perrot; Nicolas Poulet; Pierre‐yves Quenette; Michel Salas; Guillaume Souchay; Cécile Vanpé; Aurélien Besnard; Olivier Gimenez
  6. Impact indicators for culture, sports and business events: A guide - Part II By OECD
  1. By: Richard T. Carson; Joshua S. Graff Zivin; Jeffrey G. Shrader
    Abstract: Science funding agencies such as the NIH, NSF, and their counterparts around the world are often criticized for being too conservative, funding incremental innovations over more radical but riskier projects. One explanation for their conservatism is the way the agencies use peer review of scientific proposals. Peer review is the cornerstone of research allocation decisions, but agencies typically base decisions on a simple average of peer review scores. More novel ideas are less likely to gain consistently high ratings across evaluators and are less likely to be funded. Using a discrete choice experiment conducted with a large sample of active biomedical researchers, we find that—in contrast to funding agencies—scientists systematically prefer to fund projects with more reviewer dissensus. Rather than purely focusing on the first moment of the distribution of reviewer scores, they also value the second moment. Further, scientists with the greatest domain expertise on a proposal are more enthusiastic about dissensus, and while appetite for dissensus shrinks as budgets become tighter, it does not disappear completely. Applying our estimates to prior studies mimicking NIH’s review process shows that incorporating expert scientists’ preferences for dissensus would change marginal funding decisions for ten percent of projects worth billions of dollars per year.
    JEL: H40 O3 O38
    Date: 2023–06
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:31409&r=ppm
  2. By: Marco Percoco; Ana Maria Ruiz Rivadeneira; Margaux Lelong; Ludovica Mager
    Abstract: Infrastructure plays a pivotal role in achieving climate neutrality and resilience. However, infrastructure is also vulnerable to certain risks, and poor management of infrastructure assets can lead to increased dependency on fossil fuels and lock in climate-related risks. For this reason, an infrastructure governance framework is needed that can direct public investments towards sustainability objectives.To this end, the OECD has provided technical support to the Government of Ireland to strengthen climate-related and environmental considerations in public infrastructure decision making (i.e. strategic planning, project appraisal, budgeting). Building on Irish Public Spending Code and on standardised criteria based on international good practices, this working paper develops a new methodological approach to assessing the climate-related impacts of infrastructure and integrate climate-related risk and uncertainty in the appraisal of infrastructure projects.
    Keywords: adaptation, climate, environment, infrastructure, mitigation, public investment
    JEL: H54 O18 Q56 O44
    Date: 2023–07–10
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:govaaa:61-en&r=ppm
  3. By: Szekeres, Szabolcs
    Abstract: The Social Time Preference Rate (STPR) correctly measures the rate of fall of the value of future benefits, while the Social Opportunity Cost Rate (SOCR) correctly measures the cost of capital of investment projects, but neither rate can correctly compute net present values (NPV) by itself. This paper shows that there is no choice, both must be used simultaneously, a method that is equivalent to shadow pricing capital. This reconciles the two approaches, as their joint use satisfies both of their requirements. Disagreements will remain, however, as reviewed in the paper, about the value of both rates.
    Keywords: Social discount rate; Prescriptive discounting; Descriptive discounting; Two-rate discounting; Declining discount rates; Ramsey rule.
    JEL: D61 H43
    Date: 2023–07–06
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:117843&r=ppm
  4. By: OECD
    Abstract: This OECD Guide takes stock of the current advice, guidelines, and good practices for assessing the impact of global events. Global events (including culture, sports and business events) can have a significant impact on local development. Yet measuring this impact in a consistent, reliable and comprehensive way can be challenging. This Guide provides an overview of approaches to impact assessment, discusses the issues, challenges and considerations to be made in conducting impact evaluations, and offers a set of actions which event hosts can take to improve impact assessments. In doing so, the Guide supports the OECD Recommendation on Global Events and Local Development, which helps countries and future hosts bring greater local benefits and legacies from global events. This Guide can be read alongside "Impact indicators for culture, sports and business events: A guide, Part II".
    Keywords: Bussiness events, Cultural events, Festivals, Global events, Impact assessment, Local development, Mega-events, Sporting events
    JEL: R11 R58 Z10 Z20
    Date: 2023–07–06
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:cfeaaa:2023/10-en&r=ppm
  5. By: Thibaut Couturier (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Sarah Bauduin (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Guillelme Astruc (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Aurélie Blanck (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Coline Canonne (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité, CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Thierry Chambert (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Jules Chiffard (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Alix Cosquer (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Sarah Cubaynes (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Laurence Curtet (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Emmanuelle Dortel (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Nolwenn Drouet‐hoguet (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Christophe Duchamp (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Charlotte Francesiaz (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Oksana Grente (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité, CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Adrien Jailloux (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Maëlis Kervellec (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Valentin Lauret (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Jean‐dominique Lebreton (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Julie Louvrier (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Lucile Marescot (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Raphaël Mathevet (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Marie‐laure Navas (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Charlotte Perrot (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Nicolas Poulet (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Pierre‐yves Quenette (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Michel Salas (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Guillaume Souchay (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Cécile Vanpé (OFB - Office français de la biodiversité); Aurélien Besnard (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier); Olivier Gimenez (CEFE - Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IRD [France-Sud] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)
    Abstract: 1. To document and halt biodiversity loss, monitoring, quantifying trends and assessing management and conservation strategies on wildlife populations and communities are crucial steps. 2. With increasing technological innovations, more and more data are collected and new quantitative methods are constantly developed. These rapid developments come with an increasing need for analytical skills, which are hardly accessible to managers. On the other hand, researchers spend more and more time on research grant applications and administrative tasks, which leaves fewer opportunities for knowledge transfer. This situation tends to increase the gap between researchers and managers. Here, we illustrate how to fill this gap by presenting two long-term collaborations between a research unit—Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology; CEFE—and a national agency—French Biodiversity Agency; OFB. 3. The first example is a collaboration providing statistical support to national parks for the design and implementation of scientific monitoring protocols. It relies on the recruitment of a research engineer funded by OFB and physically based at CEFE, who works closely with OFB and managers. The second example is a collaboration on the management of large carnivores. For more than 10 years, it has involved several PhD students and post-doctoral fellows co-supervised by CEFE and OFB, and has recently resulted in the recruitment of a permanent OFB researcher who works half-time at CEFE and half-time at OFB. These case studies illustrate the modalities of collaborative work between public institutions acting at different levels of biodiversity conservation for the co-construction of research agendas and the exchange of knowledge. 4. These collaborations also bring out some challenges. Inter-knowledge and mutual learning remain difficult at scales larger than that of the teams concerned. The staff working at this interface needs to possess good listening skills, respect all partners' needs and demonstrate flexibility. Knowledge exchanges require time, thus reducing productivity according to quantitative metrics such as scientific publications or institutional reports. These collaborations can therefore be difficult to assume socially, and remain tenuous because they rely on a good understanding of the differences in governance of the various partners. 5. Based on our experience, success is favoured by long-term and close relationships, and by co-construction of projects at early stage. Sharing a space (i.e. office or building) facilitates face-to- face interactions during planned work sessions and casual meetings that build up a shared scientific culture and mutual trust.
    Keywords: Boundary science, Environmental management, Research–implementation gap, Science-conservation interface
    Date: 2023–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04125409&r=ppm
  6. By: OECD
    Abstract: This OECD Guide sets out a framework of indicators to measure the impact of global events on local development. Global events (including culture, sports and business events) can have a significant impact on local development. Yet measuring this impact in a consistent, reliable, and comprehensive way can be challenging. This Guide presents a set of indicators which events hosts can incorporate into their evaluation strategy to assess the economic, social, and environmental impact of their event. It offers practical guidance and advice on how to implement this framework, alongside examples of indicator use. In doing so, the Guide supports the OECD Recommendation on Global Events and Local Development, which helps countries and future hosts bring greater local benefits and legacies from global events. This Guide can be read alongside "How to measure the impact of culture, sports and business events: A guide - Part I".
    Keywords: Business events, Cultural events, Festivals, Global events, Impact assessment, Local development, Mega-events, Sporting events
    JEL: R11 R58 Z10 Z20
    Date: 2023–07–06
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:cfeaaa:2023/11-en&r=ppm
This nep-ppm issue is ©2023 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 http://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. 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.
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2023‒07‒31 at 12:13.