- Home
- About us
- ILAC Activities
- Resources
- ILAC Publications
- ILAC Briefs
- Working Papers
- ILAC Sourcebook
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Chapter 6: Introduction Part 2
- Chapter 7: Innovation histories
- Chapter 9: Culture study as a tool for change
- Chapter 12: Collaborative agreements
- Chapter 13: Facilitation as a foundation skill for ILAC
- Chapter 14: Learning alliances
- Chapter 15: Institutional histories
- Chapter 16: Engaging Scientists through Institutional Histories
- Chapter 18: Horizontal evaluation
- Chapter 19: Appreciative inquiry
- Part 3 - Cases and experiences
- Part 4 - Challenges and strategies
- About the authors
- Glossary
- References
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Reports
- Journal Articles
- Newsletter
- Presentations by ILAC Team
- ILAC Library
- Tools and methods for M&E
- Appreciative inquiry
- Biophysical measurements
- Case study
- Content analysis
- Contribution analysis
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Creative expression
- Diaries, journals and logs
- Dreams realised or visioning
- Expert review
- GIS mapping
- Graphing results
- Group assessment
- Historical trends and timelines
- Horizontal evaluation
- Impact evaluation
- Benefit-cost methods
- Case studies
- Cost-effectiveness analysis
- Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (CIE)
- Difference-in-difference
- Econometric methods
- Ex-post comparison of project beneficiaries with a control group
- Instrumental variables
- Integrated partial indicators
- Mathematical programming
- Modified peer review
- Partial indicators of impact
- Patent analysis
- Pipeline comparison
- Production function approach
- Propensity score matching
- Quasi-experimental design, involving the use of matched control and project groups
- Randomization
- Rapid assessment or review, conducted ex post
- Regression discontinuity design
- Simulation method
- User surveys
- Impact flow diagram
- Innovation histories
- Institutional history
- Institutional linkage diagram
- Interviews
- Learning alliances
- Learning-oriented evaluation
- M&E Frameworks
- M&E wheel (or "spider web")
- Mapping (sketch)
- Matrix scoring
- Most significant change
- Net-Map
- Non-random sampling
- Observation
- Outcome mapping
- Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis
- Participatory methods
- Performance indicators
- Photographs and video
- Problem and objectives trees
- Random sampling
- Ranking and pocket charts
- Rapid appraisal methods
- Relative scales or ladders
- Rich pictures (or mind maps)
- SWOT
- Seasonal calendars
- Semantic differentials
- Social mapping or well-being ranking
- Sociograms
- Stakeholder analysis
- Survey
- Systems (or inputs-outputs) diagram
- Theory-Based Evaluation
- Transects
- Evaluation studies and reports
- Evaluating capacity development
- Partnership
- Seminars
- Video Room
- Links to other sites
- E-learning courses
- ILAC Publications
- Contact
- Blog
Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis
Mon, 11/24/2008 - 16:38 — Cristina Sette
The following text is drawn from World Bank (2004).
What are they?
Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis are tools for assessing whether or not the
costs of an activity can be justified by the outcomes and impacts. Cost-benefit analysis
measures both inputs and outputs in monetary terms. Cost-effectiveness analysis estimates
inputs in monetary terms and outcomes in non-monetary quantitative terms
(such as improvements in student reading scores).
What can we use them for?
- Informing decisions about the most efficient allocation of resources.
- Identifying projects that offer the highest rate of return on investment.
Advantages:
- Good quality approach for estimating the efficiency of programs and projects.
- Makes explicit the economic assumptions that might otherwise remain implicit or
overlooked at the design stage. - Useful for convincing policy-makers and funders that the benefits justify the activity.
Disavantages:
- Fairly technical, requiring adequate financial and human resources available.
- Requisite data for cost-benefit calculations may not be available, and projected
results may be highly dependent on assumptions made. - Results must be interpreted with care, particularly in projects where benefits are
difficult to quantify.
Cost:
Varies greatly, depending on scope of analysis and availability of data.
Skills required:
The procedures used in both types of analyses are often highly technical. They require
skill in economic analysis and availability of relevant economic and cost data.
Time required:
Varies greatly depending on scope of analysis and availability of data.
Source: World Bank (2004). Monitoring and Evaluation: Some Tools, Methods & Approaches. Washington DC, The World Bank. http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/b57456d58aba40e585256ad400736404/a5efbb5d776b67d285256b1e0079c9a3/$FILE/MandE_tools_methods_approaches.pdf
For more information:
- Belli, P., et al. (2000). Economic Analysis of Investment Operations: Analytical Tools and Practical Applications. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
- http://kms.worldbank.org/edunet/TEN_DIMENSIONS/DIM_4/cb_ce.htm
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page