For assessing the desirability and feasibility of major transport projects decision makers often recur to ex-ante evaluation methods such as cost-benefit analysis or multi-criteria analysis. In these methods projects are evaluated for their impacts on the welfare of society as one indivisible entity. The use of these methods is limited for assessing socio-spatial equity, as costs and benefits of transport are unequally spread over space and society. Moreover, in projects that cross political borders these methods poorly represent the spatially differentiated interests of the decision makers. This article proposes a novel evaluation approach, applied in a study on the possible demolition of a motorway linking the three Belgian regions of Brussels, Flanders and Wallonia. The application demonstrates how the social and spatial differentiation of effects can be evaluated, allowing to differentiate impacts for crucial stakeholders or criteria, but also to aggregate evaluation results in cases where pursuing supra-local or common interests is appropriate. Whether and where decision making in transport should follow utilitarian or egalitarian distributive principles depends on context and political considerations. The presented approach allows decision makers to apply both principles where they are deemed appropriate, transparently, in a single project.

中文翻译：

---

在公平，福利和可行性之间：在运输评估中应用不同分配原则的方法

为了评估主要运输项目的可取性和可行性，决策者经常使用事前评估方法，例如成本效益分析或多标准分析。在这些方法中，对项目作为一个不可分割的实体对社会福利的影响进行了评估。这些方法的使用仅限于评估社会空间公平性，因为运输的成本和收益在空间和社会中分布不均。此外，在跨越政治边界的项目中，这些方法不能很好地代表决策者在空间上的差异利益。本文提出了一种新颖的评估方法，该方法适用于连接比利时，法兰德斯和瓦隆大区三个比利时地区的高速公路可能被拆除的研究。该应用程序演示了如何评估效果的社会和空间差异，从而可以区分对关键利益相关者或标准的影响，还可以在追求超地方利益或共同利益的情况下汇总评估结果。运输决策应在何时何地遵循功利主义或平均主义的分配原则，取决于背景和政治考虑。提出的方法允许决策者在单个项目中透明地应用被认为适当的这两个原则。运输决策应在何处以及在何处遵循功利主义或平均主义的分配原则，取决于背景和政治考虑。所提出的方法允许决策者在单个项目中透明地应用被认为适当的这两个原则。运输决策是否以及在何处遵循功利主义或平均主义的分配原则取决于背景和政治考虑。提出的方法允许决策者在单个项目中透明地应用被认为适当的这两个原则。