We argue that infrastructure projects are complex and that evaluations of such projects need to do justice to that complexity. The three principal aspects discussed here are heterogeneity, uniqueness, and context. Evaluations that are serious about incorporating the complexity of projects need to address these aspects. Often, evaluations rely on single case studies. Such studies are useful because they allow researchers to focus on the heterogeneous, unique, and contextual nature of projects. However, their relevance for explaining other (future) projects is limited. Larger-n studies allow for the comparison of cases, but they come with the important downside that their relevance for explaining single projects is limited because they cannot incorporate heterogeneity, uniqueness, and context sufficiently. The method Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) presents a promising solution to this conundrum. This book offers a guide to using QCA when evaluating infrastructure projects.
Browse by title
Lasse Gerrits and Stefan Verweij
Edited by Thijs ten Raa
Thijs ten Raa
The core instrument of input-output analysis is a matrix of technical coefficients. This input-output matrix orders national accounts by interconnecting the use and make statistics of the different sectors, traces indirect economic effects or multipliers, and is used to map environmental impacts or footprints. At all levels there are issues of its dimension, not only size but also type - commodities or industries - and resolution of these issues requires that statisticians, economists (applied and theoretical), and policy analysts (including environmental) familiarize themselves with each other's work. All contribute various chapters of the handbook and these are interrelated in this introductory chapter.