My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11629
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11629
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:18:13 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:05:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8112.600
Description
Arkansas White Red Basins Interagency Committee - AWRBIAC -- Reports
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/16/1952
Title
Application Procedures for Economic Evaluation of Projects - Second Progress Report of the Work Group on Benefits and Costs - AWRBIAC
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />, " <br />......,.' <br />..<.) , <br /> <br />.;,.... <br />..;','.-: <br />.:.'.< <br /> <br />.....,r <br /> <br />.., ., <br /> <br />The size or scope of a project should not be 'limited by the most <br /> <br />favorable benefit-cost rat'io, but should be extended to the poirtt where <br /> <br />the returns from the last increment equal the cost of providing it. <br /> <br />This does not mean that increments should be added to the point where the <br /> <br />total costs will be equal to the total benefits -- a concept which permits <br /> <br />addin~ additional units beyond the point where the benefits from these <br /> <br /> <br />additional units at least, equal the costs of installing them. <br /> <br />If..all factors could be completely taken into, account in the, mone- <br /> <br />tized estimates of benefits and costs ,of a project or plan, determination <br /> <br />of the most effective,scale of development would be comparatively simple. <br /> <br />In practic~" it is' ,found that all benefits and costs cannot be evaluated <br /> <br />and compared mathematic,ally. Consequently, the sig;nificance of intangi- <br /> <br />ble benefits and costs ,must be considered to determine, if departure is, <br /> <br />warranted from results ,indicated by analysis of monetary values. Where <br /> <br />intangible benefits and costs ,are, us.ed as a basis for incl usion of incre- <br /> <br />ments of a project or, a, plan, they shoul d be described in such a way that <br /> <br />their importance and influ~nce on project form~lation and selection are <br /> <br />clearly indicated .and should be kept separate and be readily, identifiable. <br /> <br />Different ,functional. increments of a multiple-purpose project, or <br /> <br />of a system of projects, will require determination of individual benefi t- <br /> <br />cost ratios ,for eaCh specified function. In the ,application of these <br /> <br />project formulation principles, too much emphasis cannot be ,placed upon <br /> <br />the fact that incremet)talconsiderations must; be fqrsimilarfunctions. <br /> <br />These princ'iples do not permit the, interchange, ,in project formulation of <br /> <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.