Methodology for CBA preparation

SOP Environment
Programming Meeting for water and wastewater projects
in the period 2008-2009
Mamaia, 10-13th July 2008
Massimo Marra
JASPERS Regional Office for Romania and Bulgaria

JASPERS activities

Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions

Advisory services to MAs and Final Beneficiaries EC/EIB/EBRD
Objectives: increase the capacity of beneficiary countries, support
them to make best use of EU funding, improve/speed up fund
absorption


JASPERS concentrates on Major Projects :

-

Transport and other sectors 50 M > capital cost

Environment 25 M > capital cost

JASPERS priorities are :

- large projects supported by Cohesion Fund and ERDF
- other Cohesion Fund projects
- other ERDF projects

Horizontal Issues covering more than one country/sector (as CBA)

2

What does JASPERS offer?

Assistance from early stages of project through to the

decision to grant assistance

Preparatory work required to deliver a mature project e.g.




Advice on conceptual development and project structuring

Advice on project preparation e.g. cost-benefit analysis, financial
analysis, environmental issues, procurement
planning.
Review of documentation: feasibility studies, technical
design, tender documents.
Advice on compliance with EU law (environmental,
competition and others) and conformity with EU policies

Rationale for JASPERS support on CBA



Article 40 Council Regulation 1083/2006

- Major Projects: MS to provide the Commission with ()

a cost-benefit analysis, including a risk assessment and the foreseeable

impact on the sector concerned and on the socio-economic situation of
the MS

EC Guidance
- WD 4: clarifications for period 2007-2013
- WD 4: MS encouraged to develop own CBA framework
- EC CBA GUIDE revised version published in June 2008

ULTIMATE GOALS

Ensure soundness and consistency across project proposals

Facilitate and speed up approval process (both RO and EC)

4

National CBA Guidelines

Being developed jointly by Romanian Authorities (MESD MEF)

and JASPERS

National CBA Guidelines to be consistent with EC and Romanian

requirements (HG 28/2008)

Valid for ALL projects co-financed by Structural Funds

General CBA Guidance document








Rationale and objectives

What is a CBA and why/when perform it (small projects)
General methodological Approach (discount rates, reference period, etc.)
Macroeconomic assumptions and data to be used
Valid for all sectors
To be formally embedded in national approval process

Sectoral CBA Guidelines for Water, Transport, SW and Energy









Strategic approach and definition of objectives

Project identification and demand assessment
Feasibility and Option Analysis
Financial Projections
Economic Analysis
Risk and Sensitivity analysis
Conclusions and presentation of results
5

General CBA Structure

STRUCTURE OF CBA
1. Option and Feasibility Analysis

How can an objective be achieved? Are the selected options

feasible?

CBA main
elements

2. Financial Analysis

Does the project need cofinancing? How much money is

necessary to implement the option selected?

3. Economic Analysis
Is the project worth cofinancing? What is the impact on the
area where the project is going to be implemented?

4. Risk Analysis

Which are the most likely financial and economic results?

6

Sequence of CBA Water/WW projects

Strategic approach and definition of objectives

Project identification and Option Analysis

Financial Projections

Economic Analysis

Risk and Sensitivity analysis

Conclusions and presentation of results

Strategic approach


Main strategic drivers




Compliance with EC Directives

Improvement of water resource management
(Regionalisation)
Expected impact on regional development

Project must be consistent with National policy,

NSRF and SOP priority areas

Project to support the achievement of SOP

objectives

Definition of Project Objectives

SOP Objectives Priority Axis 1
Objective 1

Provide adequate water and sewerage services, at accessible tariffs

Objective 2

Provide adequate drinking water quality in all urban agglomerations

Objective 3

Improve the purity of watercourses

Objective 4

Improve of the level of WWTP sludge management

Objective 5

Create innovative and efficient water management structures

Example Project Objectives

Specific Objective

Values without project

Expected value after

completion

1. Increase in coverage of water

and sewerage services

% of population connected to
water supply and sewerage
systems

% of population connected to
water supply and sewerage
systems

2. Improvement of quality of
drinking water to meet EU
standards (98/83/EC)

% of population with drinking

water meeting EU standards

% of population with drinking

water meeting EU standards

3. Increase of coverage of
wastewater treatment to meet
Urban WWT Directive

Number of agglomerations with

adequate wastewater treatment

Number of agglomerations with

adequate wastewater treatment

4. Establish efficient operators

and associated structures
(ROCs, IDAs)

Number of ROC/IDA with

adequate set up and capacity to
manage water/ww systems

Number of ROC/IDA with

adequate set up and capacity to
manage water/ww systems
9

Option Analysis and Selection

Assessment of existing
infrastructures

Identification of problems
(How/Why objectives are not met)

Project
Objectives

Identification of options
(What can we do to meet
objectives)

First screening and shortlist

Multicriteria analysis

National
policy and
SOP
Objectives

Comparison of retained options

(technical and economic)

Selection of
preferred option

10

Financial Analysis

To establish the level of financial self-sufficiency, financial
performance and sustainability of the project


Projections of financial flows of the project for without

(baseline) and with project scenarios:
 Total planned investment (including residual value)
 Revenues (demand evolution and tariff increases)
 Operating and maintenance costs (also estimate cost
savings)

In local currency and then translation into euros

Reference period typically 30 years

Financial discount rate set at 5%

Project impact = Difference between with and without

scenario
11

Establishing scenarios
With Project

Without project

Macroeconomic data

Shall be valid for all projects (NSRF)

Population dynamics

Same in both scenarios

Service levels
Connections and metering rate
Water consumption (domestic&not)
Physical losses & infiltration
O&M costs
Financial performance
EBITDA & EBIT
Cash flows and reserves
Debt service coverage (DSCR)
Tariff development and Affordability
Tariff increase steps

Polluter pays Principle!!

Affordability constraints

Equity considerations!!
12

Project profitability indicators



Incremental cash flows used to determine financial

performance indicators before and after EU grant



Project assessment with requested EU grant:




before FNPV/C needs to be <0 (or FRR/C< 5%)

If revenue generating: Funding Gap calculation
financial package completed with cofinancing &
loans
ensure FRR/K (return on national capital) not
excessive

Financial sustainability



requires cumulative cash flow positive for all years

ideally at project level, surely needed at operator
level
13

Funding Gap (1)

Only for revenue generating projects (as per Art. 55 of

Regulation 1083/2006

If project revenues do not cover O&M costs, then the

project is not revenue-generating

Calculation based on incremental revenues and costs,

and normally using constant euros

Depreciation and contingencies not to be included

See details in Working Document 4: Guidance on the

Methodology for Carrying Out Cost-Benefit Analysis, prepared
by the Commission in August 2006

14

Funding Gap (2)

DIC: Discounted Investment cost
Funding gap
R%

Gross self-financing
margin
(100-R)%

DNR: Discounted Net Revenue*

Funding
gap

The funding gap is the part of the investment cost

which is not going to be paid back by the project net
revenue. The funding-gap rate is the complementary
to 100% of the gross self-financing margin.

DIC DNR
Funding gap rate: R =
DIC
* Discounted net revenue = + discounted revenue
discounted operating costs + discounted residual value
15

Factors to consider in establishing FG

Article 55(2): Eligible expenditure on revenue-generating projects shall not exceed the
current value of the investment cost less the current value of the net revenue from the
investment over a specific reference period ()
In the calculation, the managing authority shall take account of the reference period
appropriate to the category of investment concerned, the category of project, the
profitability normally expected of the category of investment concerned, the application
of the polluter-pays principle, and, if appropriate, considerations of equity linked to
the relative prosperity of the Member State concerned.


Polluter pays principle: Scenario for tariffs should reflect the correct application of
the Polluter Pays Principle. For Water: WFD 2000/60/EC - Article 9. Member
States shall take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services,
including environmental and resource costs, () in accordance in particular with the
polluter pays principle.

Affordability (equity): WFD 2000/60/EC - Article 9. Member States may in so

doing have regard to the social, environmental and economic effects of the recovery
[]". Practically, total charges paid by the users for water and wastewater services
should not exceed certain commonly accepted thresholds.
16

Tariff setting and Affordability

Rationale
for
Funding
Gap
Affordability Limit

Total cost to
be covered
by tariffs
(Polluter
Pays)

MESD policy on Affordability: 4% of income for the poorest 10% of

households @ per capita 75 litres/day.
Higher tariffs may be required if financial sustainability of ROC is
endangered. In these cases, special measures to reduce the financial
burden on the poorest households
17

Economic Analysis

To establish if the project has a positive net contribution to
society (ENPV>0, ERR> social discount, B/C ratio positive)


Similarly to financial analysis comparisons between benefits

and costs, but:
 Costs measured in term of opportunity foregone
 Benefits reflects both saving in costs and external
benefits not valued by financial prices

Social discount rate set at 5,5%

Incremental impact on society = Difference between with and

without economic scenario

18

Economic Analysis

Identifying benefits


Benefits from improved access to drinking water

Benefits from improved quality of bathing and surface waters

(use and non use values)

Resource costs savings

Other benefits difficult to monetise

Adjusting costs


Fiscal corrections

Converting financial prices into economic prices

Add negative externalities

19

Project benefits and Negative Externalities

Project Benefits
Type

Base for calculation

Access to drinking water

Nr. Of households in
project service area

Improvement of
(use value)

Nr. Of people living in the

project service area

water bodies

Of households in
project service area

Monetary value

Comments

148 Euro/household/year
(2008 value)

Values for following years of

projection to be increased by
real GDP growth

20.4 Euro/person/year
(2008 value)

Values for following years of

projection to be increased by
real GDP growth

0.004 0.011
Euro/household/year/KM
river

Improvement of water bodies

(non use value)

Nr.

See Annex

Cost savings to customers

private well

Nr. Of households newly

connected

315 Euro/household/year

Cost savings to customers

sewage disposal

Nr. Of households newly

connected

348 Euro/household/year

Cost savings to operator water

abstraction

Incremental
water
savings (in m3)

Water abstraction fee

(Apele Romane)

To be detailed in technical FS

Cost savings to operator energy

consumption

CO2 emission savings (in

tonnes)

From 25 Euro/tonne in 2010 to

45 Euro/tonne in 2030

To be detailed in technical FS.

Base for calculation

Monetary value

Comments

Negative Externalities
Type
Increase in CO2 emission
sludge digestion

CO2 emission (in tonnes)

From 25 Euro/tonne in 2010 to

45 Euro/tonne in 2030

To be detailed in technical FS.

Increase in CO2 emission

sludge transportation

CO2 emission (in tonnes)

From 25 Euro/tonne in 2010 to

45 Euro/tonne in 2030

To be detailed in technical FS.

20

Adjusting Costs


Economic costs (conversion factors):

21

Sensitivity and Risk Analysis (1)



Purpose is to assess the robustness of the project

financial and economic profitability indicators (FRR/C,
FNPV/C, ERR, ENPV)

First, identification of key variables and their impact in

terms of changes in the profitability indicators

Second, calculate switching values for those variables

for which a variation of 1% results in a variation of more
than 5% in the profitability indicators

22

Sensitivity and Risk Analysis (2)



Finally, estimate probability distributions for the

profitability indicators based on the probability
distribution of all the key variables (Monte Carlo)

23

CBA Conclusions


Standard format for presenting CBA results

(Application Form info requirements)

Does the project needs co-financing??

Financial analysis
Revenue Generating

Financial sustainability ensured

FNPV/C <0;
Funding Gap

Is the project worth co-financing??

Economic analysis results

ENPV, ERR and B/C ratio
Other benefits/costs not monetised needs to be
listed
24

THANK YOU!
marra@eib.org

25