## 2 Literature Review  
### Cost-Benefit Analysis  
[PERSON] et al. [4] have conducted research on cost-benefit analyses (CBAs) of transport projects, with an emphasis on theoretical frameworks, practical guidelines, and the measurement of direct effects, shadow prices, and wider economic benefits (WEBs). Their research highlights the key drivers of an economic evaluation, such as time savings, a reduction in operating costs, and quality improvements. At the same time, they offer a simple model to avoid common measurement errors. Guidelines for measuring direct effects focus on consistency and avoiding errors. The practical rules for shadow prices emphasize the need to adjust market prices for social costs. Similar research has been conducted by [PERSON] et al. [5]. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [6] discuss the development of an innovative and comprehensive criterion for evaluating transport projects with a focus on equity aspects. The authors propose using activity-based models (ABMs) and subjective well-being measures (SWBs) to assess the full benefits of transportation projects and calculate accessibility improvements. They introduce a new measure called the \"Subjective Value of Accessibility Benefits\" (SVOA) that combines the ABM measure of accessibility with SWBs to provide a single measure that supports both equity and efficiency considerations when comparing alternatives. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [7] examined the use of a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in transport infrastructure decision-making in France. They emphasize that the CBA helps public decision makers to determine investment priorities, and it is essential to consider not only financial factors but also intangible factors such as noise and safety. Stakeholder participation is crucial for effective decision-making to consider different aspects. The research underlines the need for the transparency and accessibility of the CBA process and highlights its importance for transport investment and inclusive decision-making in France. Similar research has also been conducted by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [8] and applied to a highway project in Greece. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [9] examine the use of a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) by public transport authorities (PTAs) in Copenhagen, which appears to be the only city in the world justifying investments in bicycle infrastructure using a CBA. As the example of Copenhagen shows, reaching a political consensus on the parameters to be included, as well as their unit costs, is a key factor in the success of a CBA. [PERSON] et al. [10] analyzed the impact of different drives on urban buses using a CBA of the CIVITAS-ELAN project in Ljubljana. The results of the updated cost-benefit analysis using the available data confirm that the reliability of the analysis depends significantly on the data used or its forecast. Research by [PERSON] [11] looks at the ethical aspects of a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in the evaluation of transport projects and policies. The research discusses the criticisms that a CBA faces, such as limited applicability, problems with indicator selection, and ignorance of distributional effects. It proposes ways to address the ethical shortcomings of a CBA and highlights the importance of considering distributional effects and ethical theories in the evaluation. [PERSON] [12] explores the concept of wider economic impacts (WEIs) in evaluating transport infrastructure investments. He underlines the importance of considering WEIs alongside direct impacts in a cost-benefit analysis (CBA). He points out the need for a comprehensive assessment of infrastructure investments, considering social needs and technological innovation. Similar research has also been conducted by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [13]. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [14] address the evaluation of transportation policies and programs in their research using a variety of techniques, including a cost-benefit analysis (CBA), cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA).