scholarly journals Benefit-Cost Analysis of a Package of Early Childhood Interventions to Improve Nutrition in Haiti

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (S1) ◽  
pp. 154-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad Wong ◽  
Mark Radin
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
National Income ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Case Scenario ◽  
Base Case Scenario ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Early Childhood Interventions

We conduct a benefit-cost analysis of a package of early childhood interventions that can improve nutrition outcomes in Haiti. Using the Lives Saved Tool, we expect that this package can prevent approximately 55,000 cases of child stunting, 7,600 low-weight births and 28,000 cases of maternal anemia annually, if coverage reaches 90% of the target population. In addition, we expect these nutrition improvements will avoid 1,830 under-five deaths, 80 maternal deaths and 900,000 episodes of child illness every year. Those who avoid stunting will experience lifetime productivity benefits equivalent to five times gross national income per capita in present value terms, at a 5% discount rate. While previous benefit-cost analyses of this specific package have only estimated the lifetime productivity benefits of avoided stunting, this paper also accounts for reductions in fatal and non-fatal health risks. In the base case scenario, the annualized net benefits of the intervention equal Haitian gourdes 13.4 billion (USD 211 million) and the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is 5.2. Despite these substantial benefits, the package may not be the most efficient use of a marginal dollar, with alternative interventions to improve human capital yielding BCRs approximately three to four times higher than the base estimate.

Risk-Informed Benefit–Cost Analysis for Homeland Security R&D: Methodology and an Application to Evaluating the Advanced Personal Protection System for Wildland Firefighters

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Stephanie Michelle Thrift ◽  
Detlof von Winterfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Protection System ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Personal Protection ◽  
Large Variability ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost

Abstract This article describes a methodology for a risk-informed benefit–cost analysis that includes (i) risk analysis to quantify risk reduction benefits and (ii) uncertainty analyses to quantify probability distributions over costs and benefits. It also summarizes the lessons from 25 applications of this methodology to evaluate R&D projects of the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security. The article then illustrates the methodology with a specific application to evaluate the benefits and costs of the Advanced Personal Protection System (APPS), a new garment system developed to protect wildland firefighters. The goals of the APPS project were to reduce risk and to improve comfort. The cost analysis revealed that the APPS garments are more expensive by about $279 per garment system. Total costs were roughly $7.3 million, including the upfront project cost and the increased 5 year cost of purchasing the APPS. Benefits from reduced injuries and fatalities resulted in 5 year benefits of about $19.3 million, with an NPV of $13.6 million in 2019 dollars. In the base case, the benefit–cost ratio was 2.87 and the return on investment was 187 % over 5 years. Taking the perspective of a decision-maker when the project was first funded in 2011, NPVs are $11,993,728, $10,025,519, and $7,967,479 in 2011 dollars for discount rates of 0, 3, and 7 % respectively. An uncertainty analysis of the NPV showed a large variability, ranging from the 5th percentile of $6.4 million to a median of $19.3 million to the 95th percentile of $43.7 million in 2019 dollars. This large range was primarily due to the uncertainty about the reduction of fatality and injury risks and the market penetration rates of the new garments.

A Hybrid Approach Based on the Fuzzy AHP and Benefit Cost Analysis to Evaluating Cutting Blade Alternatives

2013 ◽  
Vol 364 ◽  
pp. 513-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Wei Xu ◽  
Jin Yao ◽  
Jun Li
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Manufacturing Systems ◽  
Fuzzy Ahp ◽  
Hybrid Approach ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Manufacturing Cost ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Ratio ◽  
Consumption Cost ◽  
Benefit Cost

The cutting blade selection has been important issue for manufacturing systems due to the fact that it might affect productivity, precision and manufacturing cost. It is a multiple-criteria decision making problem for evaluating blade alternatives. In this paper, the hybrid approach is discussed,which combined the fuzzy AHP and benefit cost analysis. An improved AHP method based on triangular fuzzy number is used to analyze the cutting performance of blade alternatives. It can make up for the deficiency in the conventional AHP. Furthermore, the benefit cost analysis is carried out to evaluate the economic performance of alternatives. The benefit cost ratio is calculated by using the fuzzy AHP score and tool consumption cost. Tool consumption cost is obtained in consideration of tool service life and procurement cost. The optimal blade alternative with highest benefit/cost ratio can be found out. In addition, the proposed approach is also illustrated on a sample case study.

The Moral Justification of Benefit/Cost Analysis

1994 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald C. Hubin
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Moral Theory ◽  
Moral Justification ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Moral Theories ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Direct Implementation

Benefit/cost analysis is a technique for evaluating programs, procedures, and actions; it is not a moral theory. There is significant controversy over the moral justification of benefit/cost analysis. When a procedure for evaluating social policy is challenged on moral grounds, defenders frequently seek a justification by construing the procedure as the practical embodiment of a correct moral theory. This has the apparent advantage of avoiding difficult empirical questions concerning such matters as the consequences of using the procedure. So, for example, defenders of benefit/cost analysis (BCA) are frequently tempted to argue that this procedure just is the calculation of moral Tightness – perhaps that what it means for an action to be morally right is just for it to have the best benefit-to-cost ratio given the accounts of “benefit” and “cost” that BCA employs. They suggest, in defense of BCA, that they have found the moral calculus – Bentham's “unabashed arithmetic of morals.” To defend BCA in this manner is to commit oneself to one member of a family of moral theories (let us call them benefit/cost moral theories or B/C moral theories) and, also, to the view that if a procedure is (so to speak) the direct implementation of a correct moral theory, then it is a justified procedure. Neither of these commitments is desirable, and so the temptation to justify BCA by direct appeal to a B/C moral theory should be resisted; it constitutes an unwarranted short cut to moral foundations – in this case, an unsound foundation. Critics of BCA are quick to point out the flaws of B/C moral theories, and to conclude that these undermine the justification of BCA. But the failure to justify BCA by a direct appeal to B/C moral theory does not show that the technique is unjustified. There is hope for BCA, even if it does not lie with B/C moral theory.

A Social Benefit Cost Analysis of Special Economic Zones in India: A Study of Noida SEZ

2018 ◽  
Vol 66 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 139-153
Author(s):  
Babita ◽  
N. K. Bishnoi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Net Present Value ◽  
Social Benefit ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Special Economic Zones ◽  
Positive Role ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Indian Economy ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Economic Zones

Special economic zones (SEZs) in India have been in news due to their usefulness vis-à-vis adverse effects on economy. A good number of opponents opine that costs incurred by SEZs outweigh the benefits. However, it cannot be denied that SEZs have played a positive role in the welfare of the economy. Thus, to examine this issue, we carried out a social benefit–cost analysis (SBCA) on Noida Special Economic Zone (NSEZ) within the context of enclave model for the period of 2009–2016. The result shows the positive net present value and benefit–cost ratio greater than one under methodological assumptions. This infers that NSEZ is contributing towards the welfare of Indian economy. One interesting findings of the study is that NSEZ is generating positive gains to economy with the absence of various market distortions which could otherwise reduce the realised benefits. Hence, need arises to eliminate such distortions from outside area of economy also to make it competitive at global level. Therefore, it can be concluded that competitiveness of the Indian economy can be enhanced with the removal of market distortions and liberalisation of rules, regulation and policies for economic development activities. Hence, the Government of India should emphasise and make regulations and policies that encourage competitiveness of the industries. JEL Classification: D04, D61, F13, H2, J01

Environmental Benefit-Cost Analysis and the National Accounts

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Z. Muller
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
National Income ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Output Growth ◽  
National Accounts ◽  
Environmental Benefit ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Pollution Emissions ◽  
Rates Of Growth

This paper demonstrates a new connection between benefit-cost analysis (BCA) and the national income and product accounts. The article computes an augmented measure of output, which is defined as gross domestic product (GDP) less environmental pollution damage. Environmental policy BCA is incorporated directly into the adjusted measure of output in two ways. In a particular time period, damages from pollution emissions are deducted from market GDP in a standard with-and-without policy comparison. Second, secular changes in damages, output (GDP), and correspondingly, in the adjusted measure of output are employed to estimate augmented rates of growth. Comparison to a no-policy counterfactual then yields the effect of the policy on the augmented measure of environmentally adjusted value added (EVA) growth. The empirical results suggest that, in the 30 states that adopted flue-gas desulfurization (FGD) technology between 2005 and 2011, augmented output grew 0.12% more quickly than in a no-scrub counterfactual. Augmented output growth in four states was at least 0.20% more rapid because of the installation of scrubbers. The paper reports that benefits-per-capita from FGD were mildly progressive and that counties with relatively large African American populations incur large benefits from FGD installation.

scholarly journals Benefit–Cost Analysis of Undergraduate Education Programs: An Example Analysis of the Freshman Research Initiative

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. rm1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Walcott ◽  
Phaedra S. Corso ◽  
Stacia E. Rodenbusch ◽  
Erin L. Dolan
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Undergraduate Education ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Ratio ◽  
Research Initiative ◽  
Benefit Cost

Institutions and administrators regularly have to make difficult choices about how best to invest resources to serve students. Yet economic evaluation, or the systematic analysis of the relationship between costs and outcomes of a program or policy, is relatively uncommon in higher education. This type of evaluation can be an important tool for decision makers considering questions of resource allocation. Our purpose with this essay is to describe methods for conducting one type of economic evaluation, a benefit–cost analysis (BCA), using an example of an existing undergraduate education program, the Freshman Research Initiative (FRI) at the University of Texas Austin. Our aim is twofold: to demonstrate how to apply BCA methodologies to evaluate an education program and to conduct an economic evaluation of FRI in particular. We explain the steps of BCA, including assessment of costs and benefits, estimation of the benefit–cost ratio, and analysis of uncertainty. We conclude that the university’s investment in FRI generates a positive return for students in the form of increased future earning potential.

scholarly journals Using Benefit-Cost Analysis to Scale Up Early Childhood Programs through Pay-for-Success Financing

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 628-653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy A. Temple ◽  
Arthur J. Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Scale Up ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Early Childhood Programs ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
The Government ◽  
Private Investors ◽  
Benefit Cost

Increasing access to effective preschool programs is a high priority at local, state, and federal levels. Recently, two initiatives to expand preschool programming in Illinois and Utah have used funds from private investors to scale up existing programs. Private-sector social impact investors provide funding to nonprofit or public preschool providers to increase the number of children served. If the measured outcomes from preschool participation meet predetermined goals, then the estimated government cost savings arising from these preschool interventions are used to repay the investors. Social impact investing with a “Pay-for-Success” contract can help budget-constrained governments expand proven or promising preventive interventions without the need to increase taxes. Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) plays a crucial role in helping to identify which social, educational, or health interventions are suitable for this type of innovative financing. Benefit-cost analysts are needed to design the structure of the success payments that the government will make to the private investors. This paper describes social impact borrowing as a new method for financing public services, outlines the contribution of BCA, and discusses the innovative use of social impact financing to promote scaling evidence-based Child-Parent Centers and other early childhood programs.

scholarly journals Benefit-cost analysis of the policy of mandatory annual rabies vaccination of domestic dogs in rabies-free Japan

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel C. L. Kwan ◽  
Akio Yamada ◽  
Katsuaki Sugiura
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Economic Efficiency ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Domestic Dogs ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Current Policy ◽  
Vaccination Policy ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Canine Rabies ◽  
Benefit Cost

AbstractJapan is one of the few rabies-free countries/territories which implement the policy of mandatory vaccination of domestic dogs. In order to assess the economic efficiency of such policy in reducing the economic burden of a future canine rabies outbreak in Japan, a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) was performed using probabilistic decision tree modelling. Input data derived from simulation results of published mathematical model, field investigation conducted by the authors at prefectural governments, literature review, international or Japanese database and empirical data of rabies outbreaks in other countries/territories. The current study revealed that the annual costs of implementing the current vaccination policy would be US$160,472,075 (90% prediction interval [PI]: $149,268,935 – 171,669,974). The economic burden of a potential canine rabies outbreak in Japan were estimated to be US$1,682,707 (90% PI: $1,180,289 – 2,249,283) under the current vaccination policy, while it would be US$5,019,093 (90% PI: $3,986,882 – 6,133,687) under hypothetical abolition of vaccination policy, which is 3-fold higher. Under a damage-avoided approach, the annual benefits of implementing the current vaccination policy in expected value were estimated to be US$85.75 (90% PI: $55.73 – 116.89). The benefit-cost ratio (BCR) was estimated to be 5.35 × 10−7 (90% PI: 3.46 × 10−7 – 7.37 × 10−7), indicating that the implementation of the current policy is very economically inefficient for the purpose of reducing the economic burden of a potential canine rabies outbreak. In worse-case scenario analysis, the BCR would become above 1 (indicating economic efficiency) if the risk of rabies introduction increased to 0.04 corresponding to a level of risk where rabies would enter Japan in 26 years while the economic burden of a rabies outbreak under the abolition of vaccination policy increased to $7.53 billion. Best-case analysis further revealed that the economic efficiency of the current policy could be improved by decreasing the vaccination price charged to dog owners, relaxing the frequency of vaccination to every two to three years and implementing the policy on a smaller scale, e.g. only in targeted prefectures instead of the whole Japan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document