|
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management |
| By: | Fitzgerald, Frances; Spiller, Beia (Resources for the Future) |
| Abstract: | Even as the United States rolls back renewable-energy tax incentives, global investments in clean technologies are rising (IEA 2025). This financial and industrial infusion has the potential to profoundly affect local economies. In rural southern Arkansas, for example, companies are poised to spend billions to extract the region’s lithium, filling the landscape with pipelines and wells while also injecting significant cash into the local economy. At the national level, the implications may be even more consequential; today, US supply chains for batteries—used to power everything from consumer electronics to military systems—depend almost entirely on lithium imports. In many ways, the technology the Arkansas projects plan to use, direct lithium extraction (DLE), represents the promise of a new green industrial economy that could deliver high-tech growth, economic revitalization, and climate benefits all at once.Realizing these benefits will be easier said than done. The lithium market has whipsawed over the past five years, and for every analysis predicting that DLE will reshape global markets (Patel 2023), another warns that its commercial viability is still far from certain (Pedersen and Iqbal 2024). Drawing on conversations with industry experts, company feasibility studies, and project finance modeling, this report provides novel insights into the specific technological, market, and policy conditions that DLE would require to succeed in the United States. We take an in-depth look at three projects in the Smackover region of Arkansas—ExxonMobil’s Saltwerx, Standard Lithium’s Lanxess project, and the Reynolds Unit developed by Southwest Arkansas (SWA), a joint venture between Standard Lithium and Norway’s Equinor—as well as Anson Resources’ Paradox Project in Utah. SWA Reynolds offers particularly strong public data and is thus the focus of much of this analysis.Resources for the Future (RFF) has identified three core challenges to market viability for DLE: price volatility of lithium, technological uncertainty, and macroeconomic factors. Regarding price, we find that lithium prices must rise well above summer 2025 levels, which were around $10, 000 per tonne of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE), See https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium to make the US projects profitable. Prices are currently in a multiyear trough, having fallen 80 percent since 2023 because of a surge in production in China (Scheyder 2025). However, this is not expected to last: Industry forecasts suggest that prices will rebound to their previous yearly average highs (~$40, 000 per tonne) over the next five years, driven primarily by rising global electric vehicle (EV) demand and the corresponding increased need for batteries (IEA 2024). SC-Insights (SCI) projects an average lithium price of around $21, 000 per tonne over the next two decades, well above the average of $16, 000 per tonne that our modeling suggests most US projects will require to break even.The second challenge DLE must overcome is technological uncertainty. Commercial viability of DLE depends on whether the technology can scale beyond the pilot stage. Although many developers report lithium recovery rates from brine of around 90 percent—a substantial improvement over the 40 to 60 percent from traditional evaporative ponds (Nicolaci et al. 2024) —these figures are based on controlled demonstrations and remain unproven in full-scale operations. More broadly, untested technology increases the risks of capital expenditure and operational expenditure overruns, and our modeling shows that cost overruns can quickly erode the financial viability of these projects, particularly if lithium prices do not fully recover. Finally, macroeconomic factors, such as inflation, high interest rates, or shifts in investors’ risk appetite, pose a risk for project economics. The 8 percent discount rate assumed by most US DLE companies appears reasonable under current conditions, but DLE’s early-stage status may make it particularly sensitive to increases in the cost of capital.If US DLE projects succeed, they could create a new domestic supply chain, generate durable revenue for local governments, and bolster US competitiveness in the global battery economy. If they falter, they may serve as a cautionary tale about the risks of betting on unproven technologies in a rapidly shifting industrial landscape. This report provides novel insights into the specific price points, technological performance levels, and policy ecosystems that DLE will require to compete, and it concludes with a discussion of the broader implications of DLE for the United States and the world. |
| Date: | 2025–10–27 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rff:report:rp-25-16 |
| By: | Schmitz, Patrick W. |
| Abstract: | We develop an incomplete-contracting model in which the government engages a private contractor to provide a public good. Over time, adaptations of the good to changing circumstances may become desirable. The contractor privately learns the costs of implementing these adaptations. We compare two organizational forms. In a public-private partnership, the government actively participates in project management and, by incurring information-gathering costs, may ascertain the contractor's adaptation costs. Under traditional procurement, the government lacks direct involvement in project management, preventing it from ascertaining the adaptation costs. We show that the government's potentially enhanced access to the contractor's information in a public-private partnership can either support or undermine the case for such partnerships. |
| Keywords: | public-private partnerships; traditional procurement; asymmetric information; incomplete contracts; information gathering |
| JEL: | D23 D86 H41 H57 L33 |
| Date: | 2025–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:126368 |
| By: | Congdon Fors, Heather (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Durevall, Dick (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Isaksson, Ann-Sofie (The Institute for Futures Studies); Lindskog, Annika (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University) |
| Abstract: | Teenage childbearing has serious consequences for young mothers, their children, and society. This study estimates the impact of foreign aid projects on teenage fertility in Malawi. We combine georeferenced data on aid projects from 1998–2016 with individual-level fertility data. Identification relies on spatial and temporal variation in aid exposure and survey timing, with controls for project placement and teenage childbearing among older women not exposed to the intervention. Results show that aid to sexual and reproductive health, HIV/AIDS, and education significantly reduce teenage fertility, while other aid types have limited effects. Women who were exposed to relevant aid while of critical age were 15-25 percent less likely to have given birth as teenagers. Likely mediators include increased time in school, delayed entry into relationships, and postponed marriage. |
| Keywords: | Teenage fertility; Early childbearing; Foreign aid; Malawi |
| JEL: | F35 O12 O15 |
| Date: | 2025–10–28 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0858 |
| By: | Hazell, Peter B. R.; Place, Frank |
| Abstract: | As the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) marks its 50th anniversary, the Institute and its key stakeholders pause to take stock of what is known about its policy influence and impact over the years. What does the available evidence tell us about IFPRI’s achievements as an international research institution? Have its activities contributed to better policy and investment decisions by governments, development agencies, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and others involved in the economic and social development of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)? This report builds on a stocktaking paper published for IFPRI’s 40th anniversary, whose findings were generally favorable, by using more recent external sources of evidence to provide updated answers to these questions. It synthesizes bibliometric and download data, as well as a series of independently conducted impact assessment studies of many of IFPRI’s research programs and projects. This task has been facilitated by the availability of 40 such evaluations, commissioned by IFPRI, the CGIAR Research Programs on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health and on Policies, Institutions, and Markets, or project donors. Additionally, other agencies commissioned several evaluations of specific country and regional policies that IFPRI helped influence. This wealth of independent assessments is rare for a policy research institution. Moreover, IFPRI’s commissioning or co-commissioning of 36 impact assessments over 25 years demonstrates a serious commitment to an impact evaluation culture and a willingness to learn from its experiences. |
| Keywords: | impact assessment; hunger; policy analysis; poverty; research |
| Date: | 2025–10–14 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fpr:impass:177103 |
| By: | Haya AL-AJLANI (European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation); Alessio MITRA (European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation); Maximilian KASY (University of Oxford); Konstantinos NIAKAROS (Columbia University) |
| Abstract: | This paper discusses the challenges in empirically assessing the impact of large-scale Research and Innovation (R&I) funding programmes, particularly those under the European Union. It explores key methodological issues such as identifying aggregate effects and spillovers, estimating long-term results and impacts, mediation analysis challenges, heterogeneity within funding programmes, and pitfalls of established econometric methods. The paper also provides potential remedies to address these challenges and presents an ideal empirical analysis framework. |
| Keywords: | Research and Innovation funding, impact assessment, econometric methods, spillover effects, mediation analysis, policy evaluation |
| JEL: | O32 O38 C18 |
| Date: | 2025–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:eug:wpaper:ki-01-25-145-en-n |
| By: | Carmen Berta C De Saituma Cagiza |
| Abstract: | This study investigates how Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) contribute to de-risking development in Sub-Saharan Africa by shaping Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) flows and supporting sustainable economic transformation. Focusing on Angola as a representative case, the research draws on qualitative interviews with international development advisors, foreign affairs professionals, and senior public sector stakeholders. The study explores how DFIs mitigate investment risk, enhance project credibility, and promote diversification beyond extractive sectors. While DFIs are widely recognized as catalysts for private sector engagement, particularly in infrastructure, agriculture, and manufacturing, their effectiveness is often constrained by institutional weaknesses and misalignment with national development priorities. The findings suggest that DFIs play a crucial enabling role in fragile and resource-dependent settings, but their long-term impact depends on complementary domestic reforms, improved governance, and strategic coordination. This research contributes to the literature on development finance by offering grounded empirical insights from an under examined Sub-Saharan context. |
| Date: | 2025–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2510.18906 |
| By: | Colleen Cunnningham (University of Utah); Florian Ederer (Boston University); Charles Hodgson (Yale University); Zhichun Wang (Yale University) |
| Abstract: | Policies that mandate disclosure of innovative project outcomes aim to increase innovation by limiting wasteful duplicative innovation. Yet, such policies change not only the ex-post information environment but also firms' ex-ante innovation incentives. Firms may slow down their own innovation efforts in anticipation of increased disclosure by others. We examine the innovation-related impacts of the 2017 FDA Final Rule amendment, which mandates disclosure of clinical trial results for pharmaceutical firms. We show that the policy hastened and increased disclosure of results for clinical trials post-completion, but also increased the time to completion of clinical trials, the time between early phases of clinical trials, and delays in development-related investments. We provide evidence consistent with mandated disclosure leading firms to wait to learn from their competitors. Our results suggest that mandating disclosure may slow innovation when there is value to waiting. |
| Date: | 2025–10–08 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cwl:cwldpp:2465 |
| By: | Chakraborty, Lekha; Pillai, Shikha |
| Abstract: | Against the backdrop of United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs' (UNOOSA’s) 2025 Landmark Study, which documents women's 30 percent global workforce share in public space agencies—declining to 19 percent on boards—this paper applies gender budgeting framework to diagnose fiscal policy imperatives in the Department of Space (DoS), India. Aligning with the foundational principles of the UN Outer Space Treaty (1967), which mandates equitable benefits from space exploration "for all people, " and with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4 (quality education), 5 (gender equality), 9 (industry, innovation, and infrastructure), and 17 (partnerships for the goals), this analysis underscores the scope of gender budgeting as a fiscal accountability tool for inclusive growth in emerging space economies. We analysed the Space budgets across 20 space centres in India, and also across 41 sanctioned Space projects to understand the fiscal incidence and marksmanship in space technology (e.g., launch vehicles, propulsion systems) and space applications (e.g., Earth observation, communication satellites). Despite the absence of specifically targeted programmes for women in the space sector within the Ministry of Finance’s Gender Budgeting Statement 2025-26, our ex-post fiscal incidence analysis reveals that ISRO's significant achievements are inherently women-inclusive in their outcomes, despite workforce underrepresentation. Key findings highlight marked variations in the gender disaggregated fiscal incidence, with utilisation rates ranged from a low of 10.9 percent at IN-SPACe to 21 percent at Vikram Sarabai Space Centre (VSSC) and 32 percent at UR Rao Satellite Centre (URSC). Fiscal marksmanship analysis reveals the deviations between Budget Estimates and Actuals are relatively insignificant in space sector. Integrating results-linked gender budgeting into space policy is crucial, which emerges as a dual lever for equity—ensuring women's voice in high impact decision-making—and efficiency, by harnessing diverse perspectives to optimise resource allocation and innovation trajectories. |
| Keywords: | Gender budgeting, space sector, fiscal incidence, Sustainable Development Goals, STEM |
| JEL: | H50 J16 O38 Q55 |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:126617 |
| By: | Dotti, Nicola Francesco (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission); Canton, Erik (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission); Benoit, Florence (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission); Cavicchi, Bianca (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission); Di Girolamo, Valentina (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission); Ravet, Julien (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission); Steeman, Jan-Tjibbe (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission) |
| Abstract: | The allocation of public funding for research and innovation (R&I) projects is a fundamental element for every R&I policy, at the EU level and elsewhere. While the mainstream approach is based on peer review and merit-based funding where the proposals with the highest scores receive funding, several alternative models have been proposed, among which the so-called ‘funding-by-lottery’ has received particular attention. Despite few empirical experimentations, the discussion on these alternative models for R&I funding distribution seems relevant because it questions the fundamental elements and values of peer review-based systems. This literature review aims to explore alternative R&I funding models to investigate the arguments in favour or against these models that question the mainstream approach based on the peer review and merit-based funding. |
| Keywords: | research funding, funding-by-lottery, peer review, merit-based funding, research and innovation |
| JEL: | O32 O38 |
| Date: | 2024–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:eug:wpaper:ki-01-24-045-en-n |