This paper discusses some institutional and procedural designs that can strengthen CBA as a decision making tool within the public sector. Our discussion is based on Chile's National Public Investment System (SNI) the earliest and most consolidated investment appraisal system in Latin America. The objective of Chile's SNI is to provide a coherent framework for identifying, coordinating, evaluating and implementing public investments. Chile's SNI has several interesting institutional characteristics. For example, it standardizes project presentation formats, establishes explicit application and evaluation processes for public funds, provides general as well as sector specific methodological guidelines for CBA of projects and programs, and introduces a system of “checks and balances” by separating the institution that evaluates projects from the institutions promoting projects. Besides describing the system and highlighting the features we believe strengthen the use of project appraisal as a decision making tool. The paper also presents data on the number of projects appraised by sector, the overall results of appraisals and other administrative data, as well as a summary of ex-post studies for a sample of road, rural electricity, education and health projects. Unfortunately, the limited data available and the lack of a proper counterfactual scenario do not allow for strong conclusions to be made regarding the performance of the system. However, the data presented serves as an illustration of the Chilean system and it may be of value to researches in this field as well as to policymakers in other countries wishing to improve their public investment systems.

The debate about the effectiveness of investments in public infrastructure initiated by Aschauer suggests that there may be substantial discrepancies between the results of conventional cost-benefit analysis and the ultimate effects of such investments on welfare. This paper takes a closer look at this issue by investigating the existence of secondary or indirect effects under conditions of monopolistic competition. We find that such effects will in general exist, and that they are potentially large, but that they can also be negative, depending on the specification of the model. With linear demand curves, indirect effects can be positive, zero or negative, with Dixit-Stiglitz they are always nonnegative and closely related to the taste for diversity, while with the logit model they are always identically zero. Free entry reinforces the positive indirect effects in the Dixit-Stiglitz model, and causes negative indirect effects in the logit model. Given this variety of results, robust empirical measurement of the indirect effects appears to be difficult.

Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) is used to optimize investment in public projects. Indeed, in many countries, BCA is mandatory for provision of most public services. However, once BCA is mandated, residents can strategically alter their behaviors based on a dynamic inconsistency that the BCA-based optimal service level depends on residents’ behaviors. This paper discusses this dynamic inconsistency problem, taking transportation services as an example. We show that the problem may decrease both social welfare and the utility of residents as compared with the first-best case, and that the occurrence of second-best outcomes depends on the reversibility of the project and the general-equilibrium interdependency with another project.

A growing body of benefit-cost analyses (BCAs) of early childhood programs has been prompted by the increased demand for results-based accountability when allocating public and private sector resources. While the BCAs of early childhood programs serve to make such investments more compelling, there are limitations in the current state of the art, including a lack of standardization in the BCA methods used, from discount rates to shadow prices. The objective of this paper is to delineate a set of standards for conducting BCAs of early childhood programs. The paper reviews the existing evidence of the economic returns from early childhood programs that serve children and families in the first five years of life, discusses the challenges that arise in applying the BCA methodology such programs, highlights the variation in current methods used, and proposes a set of standards for applying the BCA methodology to early childhood programs. The recommendations concern issues such as the discount rate to use and the age to which costs and benefits should be discounted; stakeholder disaggregation; outcomes to value, the associated values, and projections of future outcomes; accounting for uncertainty; sensitivity analysis; and reporting of results. The proposed standards can guide the choices that analysts need to make about the methods to use when performing BCAs for one or more early childhood programs and they can support greater transparency in the results the analysts provide. The standards can also support consumers of the BCA results in their need to understand the methods employed and the comparability across different studies.

The Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry (www.cearegistry.org) is a publicly available comprehensive database of cost-utility analyses of health interventions published in the peer-reviewed medical and public health literature. This article discusses the database structure, methodology of data extraction, current trends in cost-utility analyses and impact of the Registry.