Cost-benefit analysis targeting

As a general rule, simulations based on classical or quantal equations of motion may serve a useful purpose as benchmarks for model calculations. The days where such simulations may be used for routine calculations of stopping parameters are likely to lie quite a few years ahead, even with the present pace of hardware development in mind. Stopping data are potentially needed for 92X92 elemental ion-target combinations over almost ten decades of beam energy and for a considerable number of charge states, and to this adds an unlimited number of compounds and alloys. It seems wise to keep this in mind in a cost-benefit analysis of one s effort. 

Legislation which prescribes the use of one technology is unlikely to offer an optimum integrated approach in all cases and inevitably, by limiting the operator s flexibility, it increases costs. The most cost effective legislation sets end targets based on cost-benefit analysis, but it does not prescribe the mechanism for industry to use to achieve the target. 

The definition of target rehabdity levels for a considered limit state depends on the physical consequence (and, thus, the sodo-economical consequence) of structural malfunction. This leads directly to the rationale of cost-benefit analysis, Ditlevsen (1997). Recommendations concerning the target reliability are provided in several international standards, as a result of experience, calibration and economical optimization, Vrouwenvelder (2002). 

Safety assessments, with better agreement on the appropriate role of PSA, safety targets, methods and criteria for treating uncertainties, use of cost-benefit analysis,... 

ALARP requires cost-benefit analysis (i.e. simply meeting a risk target is not enough), which implies that a price needs to be put on the value of a human life in the explicit trade-off between safety and economics. Only the owner of the risk can make this decision. 

Many types of program evaluation exist. For example, Rossi, Freeman, and Lipsey (1999) distinguish between the following types of program evaluations needs assessment, process evaluation, impact evaluation, cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analysis, and targeting accuracy evaluation. We focus on the three most common types of evaluations of safety net programs process (or implementation) evaluation, assessment of targeting accuracy, and impact evaluation. Evaluations of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness are also helpful, but are rare so not treated in depth here (see box 6.4). 

The final order lists were optimised towards a minimum number of different vendors. In a vendor analysis of our database, we could observe that a significant proportion of screening compounds are offered by more than one vendor, sometimes even with identical or similar order codes. Such compounds were sourced from one major supplier to benefit from single transaction costs and possible discounts. Both after obtaining the quotes and receiving the final deliveries, we had to account for a certain percentage of dropouts due to compound unavailability. It is our experience that this varies from supplier to supplier, but typically only 90 % of desired compounds are available. Therefore, it is advisable to order in excess of the final library target size. 

---