This report discusses the state of the art in understanding the ecomic effects of major transport infrastructure projects. It examines the limits of socio-ecomic costbenefit analysis (CBA) and reviews the development of complementary and alternative approaches to assessing the benefits of investment in large, transformative projects.CBA has proved a reliable tool for ranking projects that are similar and for assessing investments that make marginal improvements to the transport system. It is much less suited to projects designed to transform the ecomy or for comparing transport investments designed to enhance regional ecomic productivity with n-transport uses of public funds to promote growth. In particular CBA does t capture all the wider benefits of transport investments, tably agglomeration effects and responses in labour markets to improved access to jobs. At the same time, the benefits of investment can be communicated with most audiences much more effectively in terms of impacts on jobs and GDP than time savings and net socio-ecomic welfare benefits - the language of CBA. For all these reasons attention in many jurisdictions is focusing on examining wider ecomic effects, in addition to standard project appraisal. The microecomic and macroecomic tools available to do this have improved markedly in the last decade but are far from mature and require significant resources. For large public investments, particularly where projects are designed to drive development and transform productivity rather than simply release bottlenecks in the existing transport network, the additional evaluation effort is worthwhile and critical to identifying the full value of the project. This report focuses on practical appraisal tools developed for assessment of the Grand Paris super-metro and London's Crossrail project.