Overview of the Economic and Social Impacts of Gambling in the United States

2013 ◽  
pp. 107-128
Author(s):  
Douglas M. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Impacts ◽  
Casino Gambling ◽  
Tax Revenue ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
The Social ◽  
Economic And Social Impacts ◽  
Social Costs Of Gambling

This chapter provides an overview of empirical research on the economic and social impacts of gambling. Issues examined include the effects of casino gambling on economic growth; the relationships among gambling industries and the implications of these relationships on net government tax revenue; the social costs of gambling; casinos and crime; casinos and political corruption; and problems with cost-benefit analysis applied to gambling.

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.

U.S. Army Engineers and the Rise of Cost-Benefit Analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 148-190
Author(s):  
Theodore M. Porter
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Army Corps ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Bureau Of Reclamation ◽  
Conflict Cost ◽  
Utility Companies ◽  
Economic Analyses

This chapter traces the history of cost–benefit analysis in the United States bureaucracy from the 1920s until about 1960. It is not a story of academic research, but of political pressure and administrative conflict. Cost–benefit methods were introduced to promote procedural regularity and to give public evidence of fairness in the selection of water projects. Early in the century, numbers produced by the Army Corps of Engineers were usually accepted on its authority alone, and there was correspondingly little need for standardization of methods. About 1940, however, economic numbers became objects of bitter controversy, as the Corps was challenged by such powerful interests as utility companies and railroads. The really crucial development in this story was the outbreak of intense bureaucratic conflict between the Corps and other government agencies, especially the Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Reclamation. The agencies tried to settle their feuds by harmonizing their economic analyses. When negotiation failed as a strategy for achieving uniformity, they were compelled to try to ground their makeshift techniques in economic rationality. On this account, cost–benefit analysis had to be transformed from a collection of local bureaucratic practices into a set of rationalized economic principles.

Inclusion of Social Subsystem Issues in IT Investment Decisions

2011 ◽  
pp. 164-183
Author(s):  
Sherry D. Ryan ◽  
Michael S. Gates
Keyword(s):  
Survey Data ◽  
Decision Process ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Investment Decisions ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Decision Criteria ◽  
The Social

Researchers have attempted to augment the traditional cost/benefit analysis model used in the IT decision process. However, frequently social subsystem issues are inadequately considered. Survey data, collected from a U.S. sample of 200 executives, provides an empirical assessment of how these issues compare with other IT decision criteria given differing decision types. The social subsystem issues considered most important by decision makers are also identified and the manner by which they consider these issues is investigated.

Precaution, Proportionality, and Cost/Benefit Analysis: False Analogies

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 281-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Rose–Ackerman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Proportionality Principle

The Politics of Precaution by David Vogel, and the edited volume, The Reality of Precaution each compare the United States with Europe over a range of regulatory areas. Vogel claims that the US and Europe changed places in recent years with Europe becoming more precautionary than the US. The edited volume covers a wider range of topics and finds that the results are mixed. The evidence of diversity in the edited volume appears convincing, but this essay argues that both volumes too narrowly focus on the precautionary principle. Rather it argues for a broader context that confronts precaution both with the proportionality principle, which is a mainstay of European Union law, and with the limitations of cost/benefit analysis and Impact Assessment. It unpacks the normative underpinnings of these concepts to suggest a broader frame for policy analysis.

Environmental costs and their impact on the net present value of a hydro-electric project in Kerala, India

2003 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Santhakumar ◽  
Achin Chakraborty
Keyword(s):  
Net Present Value ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Costs ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Net Benefit ◽  
Pulp Industry ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Cost

This paper presents the operational procedures involved in incorporating the environmental costs in the cost–benefit analysis of a hydro-electric project. The proposed project, if implemented, would result in the loss of 2,800 hectares of tropical forests and dislocation of two settlements of about 200 families who are currently dependent on the forests for their livelihood. The forests are mainly used for extracting reed – a material used both by traditional artisans and the paper-pulp industry. The potential environmental costs and benefits of the project are identified and approximate estimates of some of these costs are made for items such as carbon sequestration, bio-diversity, and so on, based on similar estimates made elsewhere. These estimated environmental costs are incorporated into the analysis, and the hypothetical estimate of the non-use value, which would make the project's net benefit zero, is estimated under different discount rates. The analysis brings into sharp focus some crucial factors that have a direct bearing on the social trade-off involved in the project choice.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document