Improving Transport Project Appraisals
In the Islamic Countries
44
Aspect Elements included
project completion the ex-post evaluation should be carried out or is this left
to occasional initiatives? Is ex-post evaluation carried out periodically on a
sample of investments or rather on a selective basis? If in-itinere and ex-
post project appraisal is performed, how are they used as a learning
mechanism?
Ad 1) Monitoring
Capital investment preparation and selection may spread along significant period of time
(sometimes evenmany years). This call for periodic revision and adjustment of the initial project
idea in order to accommodate evolving needs, newor updated information, and context changes.
A basic completion review consists in a comparison of information such as actual construction
period, project costs and outputs with forecasted figures in the ex-ante evaluation . Its purpose is
to examine whether the project was completed within the foreseen time frame and in line with
the initially allocated budget resources, and whether outputs were delivered as planned
(Rajaram et al., 2010). Being instrumental to identify forecasting errors or managerial issues,
the existence of obligations to carry out completion reviews should be carefully checked. In
order to avoid misleading conclusions, a completion review should not be confused with a
compliance audit, which, however indispensable, falls outside the scope of project appraisal.
Far from being confined to an ex-ante dimension in the pre-feasibility stage, project appraisal
should also be performed in-itinere and ex-post. It is thus necessary to check whether at project
level the appraisal is constantly updated as monitoring and management tool to improve project
resilience and, at a more general level, whether a structural mechanism exists for institutions to
learn from experience.
Ad 2) Ex-post evaluation
Often both referred to as ex-post CBA, re-appraisal carried out during project implementation
and retrospective CBA entails different timing and serves different purposes. The former
typology is carried out in the first years of the project operation and it is more a monitoring
activity aimed at reviewing the cost, timeframe estimations and compliance with the technical
requirements in the light of possible adjustments and it is basically a re-appraisal on the basis
of updated information and data. The latter is more a learning exercise aimed at measuring the
actual effects brought about by the project and at comparing the forecasted with the actual state
of the world. Therefore, it should be carried out at the end of the project life or at after many
years of operation.
Norway, with its reopening system (or post opening assessment) offers a good example of re-
appraisal in the transport sector implemented by the Norwegian Public Roads Administration
(NPRA) under the direction of the Norwegian Ministry of Transport and Communications. Since
2006, NPRA is required to annually evaluate the monetised costs and benefits of 3–5 large road
projects that have been operational for a minimum of five years and cost in excess of NOK 200