Cost-Benefit Analysis and Social Welfare Functions

2019 ◽  
pp. 397-422
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Adler
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Social Welfare Function ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Important Policy ◽  
The Social

This chapter describes and compares the two most important policy-analysis methodologies in economics: cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and the social-welfare-function (SWF) framework. Both approaches are consequentialist and welfarist; both are typically combined with a preference-based view of well-being. Despite these similarities, the two methodologies differ in significant ways. CBA translates well-being impacts into monetary equivalents, and ranks outcomes according to the sum total of monetary equivalents. By contrast, the SWF framework relies upon an interpersonally comparable measure of well-being. Each possible outcome is mapped onto a list (vector) of these well-being numbers, one for each person in the population; the ranking of outcomes, then, is driven by some rule (the SWF) for ranking these well-being vectors. The utilitarian SWF and the prioritarian family of SWFs (each corresponding to well-developed positions in moral philosophy) are especially plausible. The case for using CBA rather than one of these SWFs is weak—or so the chapter argues.

The Social Welfare Function

2019 ◽  
pp. 7-40
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Adler
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Social Welfare Function ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Arrow’S Theorem ◽  
Ethical Evaluation ◽  
The Social

This chapter provides a synopsis of the social welfare function (SWF) framework. It presents the key components of the framework, which are then developed in greater detail in subsequent chapters: an interpersonally comparable measure of well-being, which converts each outcome into a list (“vector”) of well-being numbers, one for each person in the population; a rule (the SWF) for ranking well-being vectors, such as the utilitarian SWF or a continuous-prioritarian SWF; and a procedure for ranking policies, understood as probability distributions across outcomes. The chapter then discusses the relation between the SWF methodology and ethics. This framework provides an ethical evaluation of governmental policies—an evaluation that is consequentialist and, specifically, welfarist. Finally, the chapter contrasts the SWF framework with cost-benefit analysis (CBA); and explains how the framework succeeds in producing a well-behaved ranking of outcomes and policies, notwithstanding Arrow’s theorem.

The Social Welfare Function

2021 ◽  
pp. 155-178
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Adler
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Social Welfare Function ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Policy Recommendation ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Status ◽  
Significant Divergence ◽  
Policy Impacts

The social welfare function (‘SWF’) framework is a methodology for assessing governmental policies that originates in theoretical welfare economics and is now widely used in various economic literatures. The framework translates the possible outcomes of policy choice into patterns of well-being among the population of interest, represented by interpersonally comparable well-being numbers. Policies are then ranked in light of some rule for ordering these well-being patterns (such as a utilitarian or prioritarian rule), taking account of the probability that a given policy will lead to a given outcome. This chapter presents the SWF framework, illustrates how it can be used for regulatory policy analysis, and compares the methodology to cost-benefit analysis (‘CBA’), currently the dominant policy-analytic tool in governmental practice. CBA eschews interpersonal comparisons and, instead, translates policy impacts on each person into a monetary equivalent relative to the status quo; these monetary equivalents are then added up. While CBA and the SWF framework are broadly similar in being consequentialist and welfarist, and in adopting a preference view of well-being, they employ distinct analytic structures for integrating information about preferences and possible outcomes to arrive at an assessment of the various policies that government might adopt. As the chapter demonstrates, the structural differences between the SWF framework and CBA can yield significant divergence at the level of policy recommendation.

Social Welfare Functions

2019 ◽  
pp. 123-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Adler
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Probability Distribution ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Social Welfare Function ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Individual Preferences ◽  
The Social

The social welfare function (SWF) framework is a core methodology of welfare economics. This chapter describes the approach, discusses its application to health priority-setting, and illustrates this application with a concrete example. The SWF framework conceptualizes any given policy as a probability distribution over outcomes, with each outcome in turn a pattern of well-being among the population of concern. The well-being measure can be derived from utility functions representing individual preferences with respect to the attributes that determine well-being (e.g., health, longevity, income). Different rules for ranking well-being patterns are possible, including both “utilitarian” and “prioritarian” rules. Unlike cost-effectiveness analysis, the SWF framework is sensitive to the way in which a given individual’s income, health, and longevity interact to determine her lifetime well-being. Unlike cost-benefit analysis, the utilitarian and prioritarian SWFs take account of the declining marginal utility of income. Health scholars’ traditional concerns about considering income in allocating health care are mitigated by this feature of both SWFs and, even more so, by the extra concern for the well-being of the worse off that is characteristic of prioritarianism.

Evaluation of Non-marginal Projects

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Gollier
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Social Welfare Function ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Investment Project ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cash Flows ◽  
The Social ◽  
Macroeconomic Effects ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Future Cash Flows

This chapter shows that the cost-benefit analysis can be used only if the actions under scrutiny are marginal, that is, if implementing them has no macroeconomic effects. Otherwise, one needs to go back to the basics of public economics to evaluate these actions. The chapter examines the error that one makes by following the classical discounting approach when evaluating non-marginal projects. The evaluation of non-marginal projects must be done by measuring their impact on the social welfare function. A non-marginal investment project with positive future cash flows will have an impact on welfare that is smaller than when estimated by using the standard discounting method.

Measuring Social Welfare

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Adler
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
The Social ◽  
Policy Impacts ◽  
The Difference

The social welfare function (SWF) framework is a powerful tool for evaluating governmental policies in light of human well-being. The framework originates in theoretical welfare economics and is widely used in contemporary economic scholarship, although not (yet) in governmental practice. This book is intended to provide an accessible, yet reasonably rigorous overview of the SWF approach. The framework has three components: an interpersonally comparable measure of well-being, which functions to translate outcomes into lists (“vectors”) of well-being numbers, one for each person in the population; a rule (the SWF) for ranking well-being vectors, such as the utilitarian SWF (which simply adds up well-being numbers), a continuous-prioritarian SWF (which gives greater weight to the worse off), or some other; and a procedure for ranking policies, understood as probability distributions across outcomes. Each component of the SWF framework is reviewed in detail; in doing so, the book engages both the economic literature on SWFs and philosophical scholarship regarding individual well-being, ethics, and distributive justice. The book also clarifies the difference between the SWF approach and cost-benefit analysis (CBA), which uses money rather than an interpersonally well-being measure as the scale for quantifying policy impacts. The book includes a detailed case study of risk regulation—illustrating how the SWF framework can be used in practice and how it contrasts with CBA. The book is written to be accessible to readers without much mathematical training, but is backed up by an extensive mathematical appendix.

Age 21 Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers

2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur J. Reynolds ◽  
Judy A. Temple ◽  
Dylan L. Robertson ◽  
Emily A. Mann
Keyword(s):  
Title I ◽  
Remedial Education ◽  
Program Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
School Age ◽  
Program Participation ◽  
Benefit Analysis

We conducted the first cost-benefit analysis of a federally financed, comprehensive early childhood program. The Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers are located in public schools and provide educational and family support services to low-income children from ages 3 to 9. Using data from a cohort of 1,539 program and comparison-group children born in 1980 who participate in the Chicago Longitudinal Study, measures of program participation were significantly associated with greater school achievement, higher rates of high school completion, and with significantly lower rates of remedial education services, juvenile delinquency, and child maltreatment. Economic analyses indicated that the measured and projected economic benefits of preschool participation, school-age participation, and extended program participation exceeded costs. In present-value 1998 dollars, the preschool program provided a return to society of $7.14 per dollar invested by increasing economic well-being and tax revenues, and by reducing public expenditures for remedial education, criminal justice treatment, and crime victims. The extended intervention program (4 to 6 years of participation) provided a return to society of $6.11 per dollar invested while the school-age program yielded a return of $1.66 per dollar invested. Findings demonstrate that an established public program can provide benefits that far exceed costs. Key elements of CPC program effectiveness include an instructional focus on literacy, opportunities for intensive parent involvement, and implementation by well-trained staff within a single administrative system.

The social valuation of income: a survey approach

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 808-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
David John Evans ◽  
Erhun Kula ◽  
Yoko Nagase
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Statistical Testing ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Valuation ◽  
Survey Approach

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to estimate survey-based values of the elasticity of marginal social valuation of income, an important welfare parameter in cost-benefit analysis. Design/methodology/approach – A model relating equity welfare weights to income is developed, and iso-elasticity of marginal valuation of income is tested using survey data obtained from a sample of Turkish politicians who are instrumental in policy making. Findings – Based on the survey feedback, formal statistical testing indicates that Turkish politicians, regardless of party allegiance, reveal preferences consistent with an iso-elastic marginal social valuation of income. The estimated value of the elasticity measure is close to unity for each of the political parties. Originality/value – The originality of the paper is in terms of the survey method used to obtain from Turkish politicians estimates of the marginal social valuation of income. This welfare parameter is needed in the calculation of both social discount rates and welfare weights. The paper will be of interest to academics in the field of welfare economics as well as to practitioners involved in the appraisal of social projects and policies.

scholarly journals SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE TRAINING FOR CUSTODIAL GRANDMOTHER-ADOLESCENT GRANDCHILDREN DYADS

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S357-S357
Author(s):  
Britney A Webster ◽  
Greg Smith ◽  
Frank Infurna
Keyword(s):  
Social Intelligence ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Positive Outcomes ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Social Competencies ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Mental And Physical Health

Abstract Custodial grandmothers (CGMs) and adolescent custodial grandchildren (ACG) face risk of poorer social skills and competencies due to early life adversities which have downstream negative consequences for mental and physical health. We describe an RCT examining the efficacy of an online social intelligence intervention (SII) at improving the emotional, interpersonal, and physical well-being of CGM-ACG dyads through mutual enhancement of their social competencies. Our SII is particularly valuable for these dyads because it enhances their social competencies and relationships, thereby leading to positive outcomes. Additionally, adolescence is a critical period for developing social competencies, largely through interactions with female caregivers. Our longitudinal mixed-methods approach addresses four aims: (1) Investigating if SII improves social competencies and overall well-being through both actor and partner effects; (2) Exploring moderators of SII efficacy; (3) Studying qualitatively how dyads view SII as changing their lives; and (4) Conducting a SII cost-benefit analysis. [Funded by R01AG054571]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document