Skip to content

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)

Feasibility assessment for public-sector IT projects

1. Overview: An Analytical Framework That Validates Public IT Investment Feasibility via the Present Value of Costs and Benefits

    flowchart LR
    A["Public IT budget requests<br/>have unclear, subjective<br/>economic justification"] --"Calculate the present value<br/>of social costs and benefits"--> B["B/C ratio, NPV —<br/>objective feasibility judgment"] --"Budget allocation,<br/>priority setting"--> C["Maximize public benefit,<br/>use public resources efficiently"]

    style A fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F,color:#000
    style B fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1976D2,color:#000
    style C fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#388E3C,color:#000
  

Definition: A public investment decision-making method that monetizes the total costs of a public policy or project and the total benefits society as a whole receives from it, converts both to present value (PV), and calculates the B/C ratio and NPV to judge the economic feasibility of a public IT project.

Characteristics: (Social perspective) Unlike private-sector ROI, it includes benefits to society as a whole (administrative efficiency, public benefit, externalities). (Linked to preliminary feasibility studies) In Korea, public informatization projects over KRW 50 billion are subject to a preliminary feasibility study (by the Ministry of Economy and Finance / KDI), requiring a B/C ratio of 1.0 or higher. (Supplements intangible benefits) Intangible benefits that are hard to quantify (democratic value, equity, improved service quality) are supplemented with a separate qualitative assessment.


2. Core Structure of Cost-Benefit Analysis

A. Classification and Calculation Structure of Cost/Benefit Items

    flowchart TD
    subgraph COST["Cost items (C)"]
        direction LR
        C1["Initial build cost<br/>HW/SW, development, consulting<br/>data migration, training"]
        C2["Operations & maintenance cost<br/>Labor, licensing<br/>system operations, security"]
        C3["Opportunity cost<br/>Forgone alternative investment<br/>administrative transition cost"]
    end

    subgraph BENEFIT["Benefit items (B)"]
        direction LR
        B1["Direct benefits<br/>Time saved on work<br/>workforce efficiency, cost savings"]
        B2["Indirect benefits<br/>Fewer errors, better quality<br/>effects from linkage with other agencies"]
        B3["Social benefits<br/>Public benefit, accessibility<br/>administrative transparency and trust"]
    end

    COST --> RATIO["B/C Ratio<br/>= PV(benefits) / PV(costs)<br/>≥ 1.0 → feasible"]
    BENEFIT --> RATIO

    style COST    fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F,color:#B71C1C
    style BENEFIT fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#388E3C,color:#1B5E20
    style RATIO   fill:#1E3A5F,stroke:#1E3A5F,color:#fff
  

Benefit Quantification Methodology

Benefit TypeQuantification MethodExample in Public IT
Time saved on workTime saved × hourly labor cost of a civil servant × annual case volume30 minutes saved per case × 500,000 cases/year
Paper/printing savingsExisting paper-handling cost × digitization conversion rate70% annual reduction in paper cost via e-document conversion
Travel cost savingsTravel cost saved per visit × number of cases moved to non-face-to-faceTravel cost saved as online applications remove the need for a visit
Reduced error reworkCost of handling an error × reduction rate80% reduction in input errors through automation
Social value of timeCitizens’ waiting time × the social value of timeThe economic value to citizens of reduced waiting time for a service

B. Public IT Feasibility Assessment Procedure and Criteria

    flowchart LR
    S1["Define the project<br/>Confirm purpose, scope,<br/>timeline, target"]
    S2["Calculate costs<br/>All build, operations,<br/>opportunity costs"]
    S3["Identify/quantify benefits<br/>Convert direct, indirect,<br/>social benefits"]
    S4["Apply a discount rate<br/>Social discount rate<br/>convert to present value"]
    S5["Calculate metrics<br/>B/C ratio<br/>NPV, IRR, payback period"]
    S6["Judge feasibility<br/>B/C ≥ 1.0<br/>positive NPV"]

    S1 --> S2 --> S3 --> S4 --> S5 --> S6

    style S1 fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1976D2,color:#000
    style S2 fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F,color:#000
    style S3 fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#388E3C,color:#000
    style S4 fill:#F3E5F5,stroke:#7B1FA2,color:#000
    style S5 fill:#FFF3E0,stroke:#F57C00,color:#000
    style S6 fill:#1E3A5F,stroke:#1E3A5F,color:#fff
  

Korea’s Public IT Project Feasibility Assessment Criteria

CriterionContentNotes
B/C ratio thresholdA ratio of 1.0 or higher establishes economic feasibilityThe core metric in a preliminary feasibility study
Social discount rate4.5% (per Korea’s Ministry of Economy and Finance)The baseline rate for converting public projects to present value
Analysis horizonInformation systems: typically 5-10 yearsConsidered against project type and useful life
Preliminary feasibility study thresholdInformatization projects with total cost of KRW 50 billion or moreConducted by the Ministry of Economy and Finance / KDI
Feasibility re-reviewTriggered if project cost increases 20%+ or duration exceeds 3 yearsRequested by the Ministry of Economy and Finance

Public-Sector CBA Example — Building an Electronic Civil Petition System

Item3-Year Cumulative (Present Value)
Total cost (C)KRW 12 billion
— Build cost (HW/SW/development)KRW 8 billion
— Operating cost (3 years)KRW 4 billion
Total benefit (B)KRW 19.8 billion
— Time saved processing petitionsKRW 9 billion
— Paper/printing cost savingsKRW 1.8 billion
— Citizens’ travel cost savings (social benefit)KRW 6 billion
— Reduced error/rework costKRW 3 billion
B/C Ratio19.8 / 12 = 1.65 (feasible)
NPVKRW 7.8 billion (positive → feasible)
Payback period~22 months

3. Expected Benefits and Practical Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis

CategoryKey Expected BenefitApplication & Practical Use
Securing budgetPersuades budget authorities and audit bodies with objective figuresCalculate B/C ratio and NPV during project planning and attach them to the budget request
Project prioritizationRanks the economics of multiple informatization projectsPrioritize the annual informatization project portfolio using the B/C criterion
Regulatory responseGrounds for passing a mandatory preliminary feasibility studyPrepare benefit items and calculation methodology in advance to match KDI’s feasibility-study criteria
Performance managementVerifies actual effectiveness against the plan by tracking realized benefitsMeasure realized benefits 1-2 years after project completion and report performance against plan