OCR Text |
Show Chapter 4 Evaluation TO ACHIEVE FULL DEVELOPMENT of a river basin through multiple-purpose use of the available water, it is essential to assemble a group of projects which together will come near- est to achieving regional and national goals in basin development. To do this we must find a method of comparing competing alternatives among programs, among projects which compose those programs, and among the features to be in- cluded in the unit projects. Evaluation, of course, has been part of re- sources development since the first public project. Every project submitted to Congress today is evaluated. But evaluation has generally been on a project-by-project basis, with emphasis upon economic and engineering features. It has pro- moted competition between localities for avail- able resources development funds. What critics have called the "pork barrel" in water develop- ment is the result of this competition, an undesir- able process yielding an undesirable result, which prevails in part because of imperfect methods of evaluation. The evaluation problem has been considered at great length for many years by economists, engi- neers, and Government agencies. A detailed analysis of the problem was made by the National Resources Committee in 1936. More recently it has been the subject of three studies, two of them extending over several years. The first two are the study conducted by a special committee of the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the 4- year investigation by the Subcommittee on Ben- efits and Costs of the Inter-Agency River Basin Committee. The third study is reflected in the statement on Water Resources Policy prepared by the Water Resources Panel of the Engineers' Joint Council. Inter-Agency Subcommittee Report The report of the Inter-Agency Subcommittee on Costs and Benefits represents by far the most thorough and expert job ever done on this phase of water resources policy. But it is concerned with projects. During 4 years the members, rep- resenting five agencies, codified existing practices, examined applicable economic theory, and reached conclusions as to the principles guiding economic evaluation of resources projects and cost allocation. The subcommittee states: The adequacy of results obtainable in project for- mulation and in evaluation of the justification and relative desirability of projects depends on how completely a comprehensive public viewpoint can. be realized, that is, how completely all effects on. individuals and society as a whole can be traced and evaluated in comparable terms, with full al- lowance for offsetting effects and the influence of time of occurrence on the value of project effects. A summation of project effects, beneficial or ad- verse, to whomsoever they may accrue, in terms of market values would approach full coverage from a public viewpoint if allowance could be made in the summation for all transferences, cancella- tions, and offsets. In addition, however, there may 55 911609-5C |