Bardzo tanie apteki z dostawą w całej Polsce kupic levitra i ogromny wybór pigułek.

Kimnet.nl

Kost e n - ba t e n a n a lyse bij in t e gr a le ge bie dsv e r k e n n in ge n
Sum m ary
The m et hod used in t he decision- m aking process for t ransport infrast ruct ure t o
syst em at ically ident ify social im pact s ( a social cost - benefit analysis as described in
t he guidance docum ent on infrast ruct ure effect s ‘Overzicht Effect en I nfrast ruct uur’ –
OEI ) is in principle also suit able for use in int egrat ed area developm ent
assessm ent s. However, t here are a num ber of m et hodological and pract ical issues
t hat require at t ent ion. This st udy shows t hat t he aspect s specific t o int egrat ed area
developm ent assessm ent s can be adequat ely covered by t he st andard m et hods,
ascert ains t he point s t hat require furt her at t ent ion and ident ifies t he init iat ives t hat
have already been t aken in t his area.
I nt egrat ed ar ea developm ent assessm ent s evaluat e com plem ent ary invest m ent s in
housing, em ploym ent , accessibilit y, wat er and nat ure conservat ion. I nt egrat ed
assessm ent s differ in t hree respect s from t he st andard assessm ent s of t ransport
infrast ruct ure proj ect s. First , t he efficiency gains or synergy advant ages arising from
coordinat ing or bundling invest m ent s are a m aj or considerat ion. A second im port ant
charact erist ic is t hat t hey involve plans from various sect ors and disciplines. This
m eans t hat a w ide range of different t ypes of effect s can be expect ed, including
t hose t hat are difficult t o m easure and evaluat e ( called ‘weak values’) . Third, m any
part ies are involved, from bot h governm ent and t he privat e sect or, t hat all seek t o
ensure t heir goals and int erest s are given full considerat ion in t he evaluat ion.
Cent ral governm ent is seeking t o im prove t he coordinat ion and com plem ent arit y of
invest m ent s in new developm ent and m obilit y. To t his end t he various invest m ent
budget s have been com bined in t he Mult i- annual Program m e for I nfrast ruct ure,
Spat ial Developm ent and Transport ( MI RT) . Most ar ea developm ent proj ect s, such
as t hose financed from t he Nat ional Spat ial St rat egy budget , are at t he dist rict or
neighbourhood scale, whereas t he int egrat ed area developm ent assessm ent s arising
from t he regional agendas for t he MI RT decision- m aking process are on a larger
scale. These are assessm ent s of plans for developm ent s on a regional scale, such as
t he Rij k- Regioprogram m a Am st erdam - Alm ere- Markerm eer, Rot t erdam Vooruit and
t he I nt egrale Benadering Holland Rij nm ond.
The Net herlands I nst it ut e for Transport Policy Analysis ( KiM) has inv est igat ed
whet her t he m et hod of cost - benefit analysis current ly used for infrast ruct ure
proj ect s is also suit able for int egrat ed area developm ent assessm ent s w it hin t he
MI RT decision- m aking process and whet her addit ional guidance m ay be needed.
Sy n e r gy ca n be cle a r ly r e ve a le d
Cost - benefit analysis is a good way of ident ifying t he advant ages of t he
sim ult aneous im plem ent at ion or coordinat ion of different proj ect s, w hich are oft en
referred t o as synergy. These synergy benefit s can be revealed by breaking down a
( com bined) proj ect int o subproj ect s and t hen ident ifying and com paring t he cost s
and benefit s of each of t hese subproj ect s. Com paring t he sum of t he social ret urns
of t he separat e proj ect s wit h t he social ret urns of t he com bined proj ect gives an
im pression of t he nat ure and degr ee of synergy. Synergy benefit s ( or cost s) are
t herefore reflect ed in t he cost - benefit balance of t he com bined proj ect , but t hey do
not form a separat e it em in a cost - benefit analysis.
Kost e n - ba t e n a n a lyse bij in t e gr a le ge bie dsv e r k e n n in ge n
Con side r coor din a t ion be n e fit s e a r ly in t h e pr oce ss
Under t he slogan ‘Quicker and Bet t er’ t he rules for m aking decisions on invest m ent s
in t he Mult i- annual Program m e for I nfrast ruct ure, Spat ial Developm ent and
Transport have been alt ered. A num erical cost - benefit analysis is carried out at a
single point in t he assessm ent st age. That is t he m om ent when decision- m akers
m ust choose bet ween t hree proj ect alt ernat ives, leading t o what is known as t he
preferred decision ( ‘sieve m om ent 2’) . To obt ain an overall im pression of t he
coordinat ion benefit s it is also useful t o review t he cost s and benefit s of t he proj ect s
at an earlier st age t o obt ain a pict ure of all t he effect s, but using a sim pler
calculat ion. I n general, t his can help wit h finding opt ions for im proving proj ect s and
alt ernat ives t hat deliver bet t er ret urns. Specifically for area developm ent
assessm ent s, it can also provide insight s int o t he global coordinat ion or synergy
benefit s at an early st age in t he process. I f it becom es appar ent earlier in t he
process t hat no synergy advant ages can be expect ed, t his m ay be a reason t o
decide against an int egrat ed cost - benefit analysis and t o t ake a sim pler, m ore
sect oral appr oach inst ead. The absence of synergy advant ages, or even t he
occurrence of negat ive synergy, indicat es t hat t he coordinat ion advant ages do not
lie wit h t he com bined im plem ent at ion of t he plans, but elsewhere.
N u m e r ou s e ffe ct s n ot a pr oble m ; de t e r m in a t ion of e ffe ct s n ot e qu a lly
a dva n ce d
A feat ure of int egrat ed ar ea developm ent assessm ent s is t hat t hey bring t oget her
proj ect s from different sect ors. This m eans t hat different disciplines are involved
and t here ar e oft en m any different t ypes of effect s and im pact s on t he environm ent .
Cost - benefit analy sis is em inent ly suit able for dealing w it h a wide range of effect s,
because it m akes effect s com parable by bringing t hem t oget her under a single
heading ( as far as possible) and it present s effect s in a consist ent m anner. The
m et hods for det erm ining and valuing effect s are m ore advanced in som e sect ors
t han in ot hers. Using cost - benefit analysis in sect ors w here it is not yet frequent ly
used will in t hese sect ors lead t o a dem and for m ore research int o t he det er m inat ion
and valuat ion of effect s. I n t im e t his will reduce t he differences bet ween sect or s and
disciplines in t he developm ent of t hese t echniques.
La n d de ve lopm e n t ca lcu la t ion s: com pa t ibilit y w it h cost - be n e fit a n a lysis
n e e ds a ddr e ssin g
I nt egrat ed ar ea developm ent assessm ent s alm ost always involve spat ial effect s.
Est im at es of t he effect s of spat ial developm ent s usually st art wit h t he profit abilit y
assessm ent of t he land developer. I t is easy t o ext ract figures from t hese analyses
because t hey are always available. However, t he procedures and account ing
m et hods in land developm ent are such t hat t hey cannot be used direct ly t o obt ain a
correct reflect ion of all t he spat ial effect s from a social perspect ive. The Minist ry of
I nfrast ruct ure and t he Environm ent is t herefore cur rent ly st udying how land
developm ent account s can be adapt ed t o m ake t hem suit able for use in social cost -
benefit analyses. The out com e will deliver concret e proposals for im proving t he
m et hod. The availabilit y of easily applicable spat ial equilibrium m odels w ould
provide an alt ernat iv e t o using figures from land dev elopm ent calculat ions, but
m uch st ill needs t o be learned in t hat area as w ell.
When using figures from land developm ent account s it should be borne in m ind t hat
area developm ent proj ect s are oft en m ore likely t o be am ended t han, for exam ple,
Kost e n - ba t e n a n a lyse bij in t e gr a le ge bie dsv e r k e n n in ge n
t ransport infrast ruct ure pr oj ect s. Area developm ent proj ect s are oft en affect ed by
changes in t he real est at e m arket and changes dev elopers m ake t o t heir plans in
response. Making an assessm ent by m eans of a num erical cost - benefit analysis at a
single point in t im e is risky, because t he m arket m ay change at a lat er dat e. For t his
reason, int egrat ed assessm ent s, because of t heir spat ial com ponent , ent ail a great er
risk of falling back t o an earlier st age of decision- m aking t han proj ect s t hat involve
only t ransport infrast ruct ure. Carrying out a sensit ivit y analysis as part of t he cost -
benefit analysis of int egrat ed area developm ent assessm ent s can lengt hen t he ‘shelf
life’ of t his aspect of t he decision- support inform at ion.
Pr e se n t in g e ffe ct s in t h e ir ow n u n it s
I nt egrat ed ar ea developm ent assessm ent s oft en involve effect s on t he environm ent .
These include, for exam ple, environm ent al and landscape im pact s and effect s on t he
visual appeal and im age of an area. These effect s ar e not reflect ed in a m arket for
financial t ransact ions or are j ust one of t he m ult it ude of effect s t hat det erm ine t he
price. This m akes it difficult t o derive a m onet ary valuat ion of t hese im pact s. The
fact t hat t hese sort s of im pact s frequent ly play a role in area developm ent
assessm ent s m akes it m ore difficult t o draw up a com plet e invent ory of cost s and
benefit s in purely m onet ary t erm s.
The above m ent ioned ‘weak values’ are cert ainly no longer a ‘blind spot ’ in our
knowledge as num erous st udies have been carried out and resear ch in t his area
cont inues. However, t hese st udies do not all point in t he sam e direct ion. One st rand
goes as far as possible in expressing effect s in m onet ary t erm s, oft en based on t he
idea t hat t hese effect s can t hen at least be account ed for in t he financial balance of
cost s and benefit s. How ever, t his balance is oft en given undue weight . Ot hers
believ e t hat t hese v aluat ion m et hods are st ill inadequat e or t hink t hat expressing
t hese effect s in m onet ary t erm s obscur es t heir nat ure and t heir real im pact . For t he
cost - benefit analy sis it is m ore urgent t hat t his issue is resolv ed t han t hat t he
available volum e of research out put on t his t opic is expanded furt her.
I n line wit h t he OEI guidance docum ent on infrast ruct ure effect s, it is desirable not
only t o present a balance of cost s and benefit s, but also t o provide an overview of
t he effect s in t heir own ‘unit s’ ( for exam ple, t he num ber of affect ed resident s, t he
area of im pact ed landscape, et c.) . This would allow governm ent officials and
polit icians, t he people w ho event ually t ake t he final decision, t o form an im pression
of t he act ual nat ure and scale of t he effect s.
I f t he correct ness of a m et hod for expressing an effect in m onet ary t erm s rem ains
disput ed, it m ay help t o m ake assum pt ions or supposit ions about t he valuat ion of
effect s, define t he m argins wit hin which t hese values are expect ed t o lie and t o
assess t he sensit ivit y of t he out com es w it h regard t o t he assum pt ions m ade. I f no
suit able m et hod is available for expressing an effect in m onet ary t erm s, t hat effect
is t hen m ent ioned in t he balance of t he cost - benefit analysis as an unquant ifiable
it em . I n such cases it m ay som et im es be possible t o indicat e whet her t his is a
( highly) posit ive or ( highly) negat ive effect . I t is im port ant t hat t he people using t he
decision- support inform at ion are aware t hat t here are relevant it em s t hat cannot be
properly expr essed in m onet ary t erm s; t he unquant ifiable it em s in t he cost - benefit
analy sis are t herefore not negligible residual it em s. This is t rue for every cost -
benefit analysis, but part icularly for cost - benefit analyses for area developm ent
assessm ent s.
Kost e n - ba t e n a n a lyse bij in t e gr a le ge bie dsv e r k e n n in ge n

M or e a n d be t t e r com m u n ica t ion e n h a n ce s t h e cla r it y of cost - be n e fit
a n a lysis ou t com e s
Anot her specific feat ure of int egrat ed area developm ent assessm ent s is t hat t hey
involve several st akeholders wit h varied backgrounds. Transcending adm inist rat ive
boundaries m eans t he involvem ent of various governm ent aut horit ies, each w it h it s
own int erest s, and t hat t hose involved will each have different levels of knowledge
and experience of using cost - benefit analyses. Bringing t hese st akeholders t oget her
in a session t o explore t he possible effect s of t he plan at t he beginning of t he
planning and decision- m aking process will creat e a broader base of shared insight s
int o t he effect s of t he plan and how t hese t ranslat e int o welfare changes relevant t o
t he cost - benefit analysis.
I n addit ion t o t he effect s expect ed by t he st akeholders t hat can be ident ified one-
on- one in t he cost - benefit analysis, som e effect s can rem ain ‘hidden’ in t he
calculat ions. This m ay occur in t hree w ays:
1.
Effect s are hidden in a redist ribut ion effect . Exam ple: Region A becom es m ore accessible and at t ract s m ore businesses. However, t his is at t he expense of r egion B, which loses businesses. At t he nat ional level t here is no net effect , but at t he level of region A, t hough, t here is clearly a change. Because different st akeholders are involved in area developm ent assessm ent s, it is relevant t o ensure t hat t he cost - benefit analysis also reveals t he spat ial redist ribut ion effect s. The OEI guidance docum ent used for infrast ruct ure proj ect s shows t hat t his is possible, but it is oft en not done in pract ice. I t is even m ore urgent t hat t his occurs in int egrat ed area developm ent assessm ent s. Effect s are hidden in a non- specified aspect of a wider effect . Exam ple: Em issions of PM10 are included, but not separat ely specified, under t he cat egory ‘Em issions’. The safet y of cyclist s is incorporat ed wit hin t he it em ‘Reduct ion in num ber of deat hs and inj uries’. The involvem ent in area developm ent assessm ent s of st akeholders wit h lim it ed knowledge and experience wit h cost - benefit analyses requires m ore explanat ion of how such effect s are recorded. The effect has t o be ‘t ranslat ed’ int o a cost - benefit t erm . Exam ple: A local aut horit y expect s a proj ect t o lead t o ‘im proved com pet it iveness for t he business com m unit y’. These im provem ent s can ( largely) be t raced t o ‘gains in t ravel t im e and t ravel t im e reliabilit y’, for which t here is an explicit it em in t he cost - benefit analysis. This, t oo, requires furt her explanat ion. Finally, local st akeholders m ay consider cert ain effect s t hat do not appear in t he cost - benefit analysis t o be im port ant . These are effect s t hat fall out side t he scope of t he cost - benefit analysis because t hey do not have any econom ic welfare effect s. For exam ple, a local aut horit y m ay consider t hat a m easure should ‘cont ribut e t o a balanced populat ion com posit ion', whereas it is not clear t hat t his obj ect ive will cont ribut e t o great er prosperit y. The out com e of t he cost - benefit analysis can be m ade m ore accessible and com prehensible t o t he various ( regional) decision- m akers and polit icians by also providing a descript ion of t he degree t o which proj ect s cont ribut e t o m eet ing policy obj ect ives. Kost e n - ba t e n a n a lyse bij in t e gr a le ge bie dsv e r k e n n in ge n
Qu ick e r a n d Be t t e r , a lso for in t e gr a t e d a r e a de ve lopm e n t a sse ssm e nt s
Bringing st akeholders t oget her in a session at t he beginning of t he planning and
decision- m aking process in order t o explore all t he possible effect s of t he plan
m ight slow down t he decision- m aking process. I n t he int erest s of a ‘Quicker and
Bet t er’ process, t his would appear at first sight t o be unfavourable. How ever, t his
invest m ent in t im e can reap dividends lat er in t he process by generat ing broader
support and delivering a ‘Bet t er’ proj ect .

Source: http://www.kimnet.nl/sites/kimnet.nl/files/summary-cost-benefit-analysis-for-integrated-area-development-assessments.pdf

Lewybodyjournal.pdf

Lewy Body Journal: Our Family's Experience with Lewy Body Disease e-mail: comments "at" LewyBodyJournal.org Journal Contents Journal Introduction .11. Who Mother Was.22. First Hints of Trouble.33. The Signs Become More Pronounced.54. Back to the Neurologist.75. Aricept and Mother's Quick Decline.86. Columbia Presbyterian Hospital .97. Dr. Jekyll and Mrs. Hyde.118. Living Arrangeme

Microsoft word - proposal-g3-adambertrand-yasminehovakeemian.doc

ECE 750 - T11: Component Based Software Systems Developing an Autonomous Mobile Robot: A Component Based Approach Introduction: Robotics is an emerging, multidisciplinary field lending itself readily to component based design including component based software systems (CBSS). By using CBSS, rapid robot development at a low cost is possible. However, in order to do so, a software fra

Copyright © 2010-2014 Medical Articles