Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis
Edited by Cathy Macharis and Gino Baudry
Chapter 6: Comparing Cost-Benefit Analysis and Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis: the case of Blackpool and the South Fylde Line
Considering how major transport projects should be assessed continues to generate debate amongst academics, infrastructure specialists, investors and governments alike. This chapter compares traditional Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analyis (MAMCA) methodologies. It considers the South Fylde Line, linking Blackpool, a large town and seaside resort in North West England, the Fylde Coast and the city of Preston. The authors critically discuss the appraisal of three potential alternative improvements of the rail line, proposed with the view to supporting regeneration in the area. The appraisal includes both a CBA and a MAMCA exercise. Based on this analysis, the authors contends that, particularly in areas characterized by severe social deprivation problems, a MAMCA approach to appraisal may be preferable to analyst-led, economic-centric tools such as CBA. However, participatory MCA methodologies should not be regarded as a panacea for better decisions and their application is also subject to several issues which require careful consideration.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.