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 Type | Quantification Method | Example in Public IT |
|---|---|---|
| Time saved on work | Time saved × hourly labor cost of a civil servant × annual case volume | 30 minutes saved per case × 500,000 cases/year |
| Paper/printing savings | Existing paper-handling cost × digitization conversion rate | 70% annual reduction in paper cost via e-document conversion |
| Travel cost savings | Travel cost saved per visit × number of cases moved to non-face-to-face | Travel cost saved as online applications remove the need for a visit |
| Reduced error rework | Cost of handling an error × reduction rate | 80% reduction in input errors through automation |
| Social value of time | Citizens’ waiting time × the social value of time | The 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
| Criterion | Content | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| B/C ratio threshold | A ratio of 1.0 or higher establishes economic feasibility | The core metric in a preliminary feasibility study |
| Social discount rate | 4.5% (per Korea’s Ministry of Economy and Finance) | The baseline rate for converting public projects to present value |
| Analysis horizon | Information systems: typically 5-10 years | Considered against project type and useful life |
| Preliminary feasibility study threshold | Informatization projects with total cost of KRW 50 billion or more | Conducted by the Ministry of Economy and Finance / KDI |
| Feasibility re-review | Triggered if project cost increases 20%+ or duration exceeds 3 years | Requested by the Ministry of Economy and Finance |
Public-Sector CBA Example — Building an Electronic Civil Petition System
| Item | 3-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 petitions | KRW 9 billion |
| — Paper/printing cost savings | KRW 1.8 billion |
| — Citizens’ travel cost savings (social benefit) | KRW 6 billion |
| — Reduced error/rework cost | KRW 3 billion |
| B/C Ratio | 19.8 / 12 = 1.65 (feasible) |
| NPV | KRW 7.8 billion (positive → feasible) |
| Payback period | ~22 months |
3. Expected Benefits and Practical Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis
| Category | Key Expected Benefit | Application & Practical Use |
|---|---|---|
| Securing budget | Persuades budget authorities and audit bodies with objective figures | Calculate B/C ratio and NPV during project planning and attach them to the budget request |
| Project prioritization | Ranks the economics of multiple informatization projects | Prioritize the annual informatization project portfolio using the B/C criterion |
| Regulatory response | Grounds for passing a mandatory preliminary feasibility study | Prepare benefit items and calculation methodology in advance to match KDI’s feasibility-study criteria |
| Performance management | Verifies actual effectiveness against the plan by tracking realized benefits | Measure realized benefits 1-2 years after project completion and report performance against plan |