105 206 105 117 2007 105 3 LCC 110 106 LCC 111 106 1 111 107 2 112 1 107 3 114 2 108 115 109 115 1 LCC 110 Summary 117 2 110 2005 3 LCC 19 3 6 LCC LCC LCC 1.0 2 3, 1997 B/C Cost Benefit Ratio 1997 NPV Net Present Value IRR Internal Rate of Return 1997
106 2062007, 2005 LCC LCC LCA 2/3 12 1,517 740 2,257 2/3 1 2 NPV, B/C IRR LCC Life-Cycle Cost LCC LCC 1 LCC NPV B/C IRR LCC Table 1 Table 1 Comparison Among Various Economic Analysis Methods
107 NPV, B/C, IRR 2 Stiglitz,, 1989 NPV, B/C, IRR NPV NPV 100% Higgins,, 1994 NPV NPV NPV NPV 1999NPV NPV Higgins,, 1994 1 2 3 NPV 2 NPV NPV B/C B/C B/C 1 B/C, 1982 1 B/C B/C k k 2 NPV B/C B/C NPV IRR IRR IRRIRR IRR IRR,1999; Boarman et al., 2004 1 IRR
108 2062007 2 IRR3 IRR IRRB/C 4 NPV IRR 5 6 1997 IRR 3 NPV B/C NPVIRR 3 Table 2 Table 2 1997 Comparison Among Economic Analysis Methods Table 3 Table 3 Economic Analysis Methods Used by Public Sector NPV IRR World Bank, 1996 NPV 10 12% World Bank, 1996 ADB
109 IRR Asian Development Bank, 1997IRR FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return 2 FIRR EIRR FIRR EIRR ADBFIRR 20% EIRR 12% 15 8 http://www.mlit. go.jp/road/sign/pc/030806.html B/C 4% 40 Fig.1 B/C 1.5 24 51 9 B/C 2 2 3 4 1.0 B/C 4% Fig.1 HP Outline of Analysis Flow of MLIT LCC
110 2062007 LCC LCC LCC LCC LCC LCC 2003 FHWA Federal Highway Administration LCC LCCU.S Department of Transportation 2003LCC 1997 LCC 2003LCC LCC LCC 2002 LCC B/C LCC 1 Hudson et al., 2001 LCC Hudson et al.,, 2001 2005 LCC LCC LCC Hudson et al.,, 2001
2005 LCC NPV, B/C, IRR LCC LCC LCC U.S. Department of Transportation, 1999, 1982 LCC LCC LCC LCC LCC LCC LCC LCC 111
112 2062007 LCC, Boarman et al., 2004Table 4 4% 2010 4.52.8 2002 4% LCC FHWA Federal Highway Administration PONTIS, 2001, 2003 LCC LCC, 2005, 2005 Table 4 Social Discout Rates of Japan s Public Works LCC 1997 1994 LCC LCC 1 4% 2 3 4 LCC FHWA U.S. Department of Transportation, 1999 LCC LCC U.S. Department of Transportation, 2002, 2004 LCC LCCLCC LCC LCC
113 FHWAU.S Department of Transportation, 1998 2004 LCC t LCC LCC( t) C l + t C ( i) + R i 1 i 1 R( i) + C 1 C l C R (i) R(i) C L t L Fig.2 31 63 95,595 LCC Table 5 3 LCC Fig.350 30 LCC LCC LCC U.S. Department of Transportation, 2002, 2004 LCC Fig.2, 2004 Simplified Agricultural Hydraulic Structure
114 2062007 Table 5,2004 Costs and Risks for Renewal Plans Fig.3,2004 Accumulated Lifecycle Cost of Renewal Plans LCC LCC LCC, 1997 LCC 2003 LCC 9 1992 2000 828 7 1 r 47Table 6 13 Fig.4 6 10 1992 2000 1 Fig.5
115 Table 6 13 (New York City Department of Transportation, 2000) 13 Parts and Their Weights Used for Evaluating Healthy Level of Whole Bridges Fig.4, 2003 Average Deterioration Curves Taking Account Into Effects of Implementing Rehabilitation LCC LCC LCC 1 2 3 LCC 1 LCC 2 4% 3 4 5 LCC LCC LCC LCC Fig.5, 2003 Trend of Annual Average Estimated Life-Span of Bridges 1 Asian Development Bank (1997) Guidelines for the Economic Analysis of Projects, 204p. 2 Asian Development Bank (1999) Handbook for the Economic Analysis of Water Supply Projects, 382p.
116 2062007 3 Boarman A. E., Greenberg D. H., Vining A. R., Weimer D. L., 2004 673p. 41997 No.111 p.4-12 5 Higgins R. C., 1994 243p. 6 1999MBA 285p. 7 Hudson. W. R., Haas R., Uddin W., 2001[ ]373p. 82005 No.73(11), pp.1-2 9 2003 No.744/IV-61, pp.39-50 102003 No.744/IV-61, pp.29-38 11 2005 No.801/I-73. pp.83-96 122005 No.793/IV-68, pp.59-71 13 2003 No.744/IV-61, pp.15-27 14http://www.mlit.go.jp/road/sign/ pc/030806.html 152001 No.667/IV-50, pp.1-14 16 1997 Bridge management system BMS No.560/VI-34, pp.91-106 17 2004 ARIC No.72, pp.54-61 182004 vol.89 no.8, pp.24-26 191994 No. 501/I-29, pp.1-10 20 1997 761p. 21 1982 228p. 22 New York City Department of Transportation (2000) 1999 New York City Bridges and Tunnels Annual Condition Report 23 2002 Vol.26 24 2005, 195p. 252004 JCOS- SAR 2004 262005 27 Stiglitz J. E., 1989 343p. 28 2002 No.70 12, pp.11-15 29 U.S. Department of Transportation (1998) Life-Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design, 107p. 30 U.S. Department of Transportation (1999) Asset Management Primer, 30p. 31 U.S. Department of Transportation (2002) Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Primer, 24p. 32 U.S Department of Transportation (2003) Economic Analysis Primer, 35p. 33 World Bank (1996) Handbook on Economic Analysis of Investment Operations, 160p.
117 Adaptability of Life-Cycle Cost Method as Economic Analysis Method for Stock Management of Agricultural Irrigation Infrastructure KITAMURA Koji, HONMA Shinya, IMAIZUMI Masayuki, and KATO Takashi Summary In this study, the economic analysis method for the stock management of agricultural irrigation infrastrcture has been examined. In general, LCC (Life-Cycle Cost) method is used as the economic analysis method for the asset management of various infrastructure assets although the LCC method uses only costs, and disregards the benefits related to the investment. Therefore, the reasons why the LCC method is used as the economic analysis method for the asset management has been examined, by comparing the other methods using both benefits and costs such as the net present value, the cost benefit ratio, and the internal rate of return. Furthermore, the important issues for using the LCC method as the economic analysis method for the stock management of the agricultural irrigation infrastructure have been examined. The examined issues are: (i) determination of the social discount rate; (ii) agency costs and users costs; and (iii) forecast of infrastructure s life-span. These issues should be further examined to meet the requirement of the stock management for the agricultural irrigation infrastructure. Keywords :agricultural irrigation infrastructure, life-cycle cost, economic analysis method, cost benefit analysis