Kansas Business Review Abstracts

Vol. 22, No.3, Spring 1999


Benefits and Costs of the Kansas Comprehensive Highway Program

by David Burress and Patricia Oslund, Institute for Public Policy and Business Research, University of Kansas

At the request of the Kansas Department of Transportation, the Institute for Public Policy and Business Research prepared a benefit-cost analysis for the Kansas Comprehensive Highway Program (KCHP), comparing the consequences of the KCHP with what would have happened had the KCHP not been adopted. The main purpose of the report was to provide benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) for the program as a whole. BCRs measure the quality of a program. Conceptually, if and only if the BCR is greater than 1, then benefits exceed costs and the program has made Kansas as a whole better off. The report focuses on effects of the program on Kansans only. The purpose of the report is to assist Kansans in making highway policy decisions; in particular, it helps them understand what policies would be in the best interests of Kansans. As in many conventional benefit-cost studies, the report focuses mainly on the aggregate income dimension of costs and benefits. From the point of view of the Kansas economy, the most important single effect of the KCHP was to raise around $3.1 billion in state tax revenues and spend it on highway costs, and also leverage an additional $1.1 billion in federal highway funds into the state of Kansas, during the calendar years 1990-1996. There were substantial user benefits from the KCHP. The travel time gains in particular have a very high dollar value. The KCHP also created substantially safer driving conditions; however, although there were fewer accidents, the accidents that did occur were more deadly. After putting together all costs and benefits that were estimated using detailed modeling, we found an overall BCR of between 3 and 7, depending on the discount rate. However, the most likely value is around 4.


Year 2000 Readiness of Kansas Hospitals, Municipalities, Counties and School Districts

by Joseph A. Aistrup, John W. Durham , and Tonja Vallin, Fort Hays State University

This study reports the findings from two surveys of Kansas hospitals, municipal and county governments, and school districts concerning their preparedness for the Y2K problem. The findings presented in this article suggest that Y2K preparedness is beginning to permeate into all different types of local organizations. However, only 47 percent of organizations have an emergency plan in the event of Y2K related failures. Perhaps even more disturbing is that of those organizations that are uncertain of the possible impact of Y2K on critical services, 61 percent do not have an emergency plan. All this suggests that efforts on the part of all concerned need to be intensified betwen now and the end of the year to ensure that these organizations are prepared for the year 2000.


Determinants of Admission Rates for Avoidable Hospitalization Conditions in Kansas

by Donald Lien, and Jiwei Su, Department of Economics, University of Kansas

This note documents the effects of socio-economic factors and insurance status on the admission rates for patients in Kansas who encountered avoidable hospitalization conditions (AHCs). AHCs are medical conditions which, if not treated in a primary care setting promptly would lead to hospitalization. We selected eight AHCs: epilepsy, hypertension, congestive heart failure, pneumonia, asthma, urinary tract infection, diabetes, and gangrene. Major determinants are patient characteristics, such as insurance status, income, race, and gender.


County Trade Pull Factors, FY 1998

by David Darling and Sara Logan, Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University

This report provides the retail market data on all 105 counties for FY 1998. A County Trade Pull Factor (CTPF) is a measure of retail trade strength. The reader should interpret at CTPF of 1.00 as a perfect capture of local trade by the county businesses that collect sales tax on customer purchases. CTPF values greater than 1.00 indicate that local businesses are capturing or pulling in trade from beyond their county borders; CTPF values of less than 1.00 indicate that trade is leaking out of the county. A map and tables indicate the CTPFs and Trade Area Capture for all the counties in Kansas.


Kansas Competitiveness

by the Kansas Technology Enterprise Corporation, and the Institute for Public Policy and Business Research, University of Kansas

In December, 1998, the Kansas Technology Enterprise Corporation published the Kansas Innovation Index, 1999, a report card on the status of Kansas, which examined 33 indicators in four broad categories: Economic Structure, Innovation, Competitiveness, and Human Resources and Infrastructure. This article describes the Competitiveness category.







Copyright@1999 IPPBR, All Rights Reserved