The annual budget cycle in urban road/transport authorities by implication requires transport infrastructure projects to be ranked in terms of their relative value, to enable project selection by starting from the most deserving proposal. This follows from the fact that the total cost of feasible projects practically always exceeds available funds, signalling the need for some kind of selection protocol. Cost benefit analysis (CBA), when applied in a narrow sense, is not suitable for this purpose as it focuses on economic efficiency only. Attempts to broaden it have been criticized by some scholars. Although the diversity of impacts points to a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) approach, this is considered unscientific in certain quarters; at best, its practical value needs to be demonstrated. In the case of the City of Tshwane (CoT), problems with current project appraisal are evident in that different methods – none of which is defensible – are used, sometimes resulting in rankings that are contradictory. This thesis therefore attempts the following: (a) to develop a basic approach that combines the best elements of traditional methods; (b) to customize this approach to the specific context and needs of road authorities in the municipal sphere of government, using CoT as an example; and (c) to demonstrate the application of the resulting appraisal framework, utilizing appropriate decision-support software for this purpose. Recommendations include the following: An appraisal framework should combine CBA and MCA by adopting an overall MCA approach with economic efficiency – focusing on the optimal allocation of scarce resources – as one of the decision criteria. For completeness‟ sake, three additional decision criteria are deemed necessary: equity (focusing on income distribution impacts); sustainability (focusing on environmental impacts); and compatibility (focusing on the alignment of projects with stated goals and objectives). This framework may well apply to road authorities in other spheres of government – the optimum application in each case will depend on the composition of the relevant decision-making team. The inherent nature of project appraisal requires a two-phased approach in all cases: the evaluation of mutually exclusive alternatives, followed by the ranking of independent projects. State-of-the-art decision support software is indispensable for implementing this framework. / Transport Economics / D. Com. (Transport Economics)

The annual budget cycle in urban road/transport authorities by implication requires transport infrastructure projects to be ranked in terms of their relative value, to enable project selection by starting from the most deserving proposal. This follows from the fact that the total cost of feasible projects practically always exceeds available funds, signalling the need for some kind of selection protocol. Cost benefit analysis (CBA), when applied in a narrow sense, is not suitable for this purpose as it focuses on economic efficiency only. Attempts to broaden it have been criticized by some scholars. Although the diversity of impacts points to a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) approach, this is considered unscientific in certain quarters; at best, its practical value needs to be demonstrated. In the case of the City of Tshwane (CoT), problems with current project appraisal are evident in that different methods – none of which is defensible – are used, sometimes resulting in rankings that are contradictory. This thesis therefore attempts the following: (a) to develop a basic approach that combines the best elements of traditional methods; (b) to customize this approach to the specific context and needs of road authorities in the municipal sphere of government, using CoT as an example; and (c) to demonstrate the application of the resulting appraisal framework, utilizing appropriate decision-support software for this purpose. Recommendations include the following: An appraisal framework should combine CBA and MCA by adopting an overall MCA approach with economic efficiency – focusing on the optimal allocation of scarce resources – as one of the decision criteria. For completeness‟ sake, three additional decision criteria are deemed necessary: equity (focusing on income distribution impacts); sustainability (focusing on environmental impacts); and compatibility (focusing on the alignment of projects with stated goals and objectives). This framework may well apply to road authorities in other spheres of government – the optimum application in each case will depend on the composition of the relevant decision-making team. The inherent nature of project appraisal requires a two-phased approach in all cases: the evaluation of mutually exclusive alternatives, followed by the ranking of independent projects. State-of-the-art decision support software is indispensable for implementing this framework. / Transport Economics / D. Com. (Transport Economics)