Examination of cost/benefit balancing between preservation and development under the regional growth management policy in the US

2002 ◽  
Vol 37 (0) ◽  
pp. 757-757
Author(s):  
Miki Yasui ◽  
Takashi Onishi
Keyword(s):  
Regional Growth ◽  
Growth Management ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Management Policy ◽  
The Us

Detroit’s bankruptcy: treating the symptom, not the cause

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Galster
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Regional Growth ◽  
Growth Management ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Tax Base ◽  
White Middle Class ◽  
Death Spiral ◽  
Expressway Construction ◽  
The City

In 2013 Detroit became the largest municipality to declare bankruptcy. Unfortunately, bankruptcy does not treat the long-term cause of Detroit’s financial crisis: the ongoing fiscal death spiral triggered by loss of industrial, commercial and residential tax base starting in the 1950s. The first loss came from manufacturers who abandoned older factories in the city in favor of suburban locations. The second came from the federal government, whose guarantees for FHA-VA mortgages and subsidies for expressway construction spurred suburbanization of Detroit’s (overwhelmingly white) middle class. Detroit trimmed services and raised tax rates in response. But this made it an increasingly uncompetitive location, thereby further contracting its property and income tax bases, forcing still more cuts in services and increases in tax rates. What is required to break out of the fiscal death spiral in which Detroit finds itself is substantially more federal and state revenue sharing and regional growth management.

scholarly journals The New Control of Territory and Urban Planning: the Eminent Domain in the US

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Sonia Paone
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Eminent Domain ◽  
Public Utility ◽  
Transfer Property ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
The City

The article analyses the transformations of the use of eminent domain in the United States in the context of urban redevelopment programs. In the past the private property has been expropriated for public use only. Recently it is possible to forcibly transfer property, from a private subject to private developers, on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis that demonstrates that the new use is more efficient than the previous one. This profound change has been possible thanks to a progressive modification of the concept of public use. Traditionally, public use coincided with the construction of infrastructures and public utility, such as highways and railroads. Over the time, it has come to include other aims: firstly, projects of urban renewal and economic development carried forth by private developers. Essentially, it has resulted in the use of expropriation to assemble lands which are then granted to subjects who intervene in the reconfiguration of the city for private purposes. Starting from some important examples of urban development, the main phases of this process are reconstructed, also taking into account the most important decisions of the US Supreme Court that contributed to the change of doctrine, invalidating the postulate of public use as justification for expropriation.

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.

The State—Local Regulatory Nexus in US Growth Management: Claims of Property and Participation in the Localist Resistance

1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
T A Clark
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Regional Growth ◽  
Growth Management ◽  
Private Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private Land ◽  
Local Participation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Starting Point

Influenced possibly more by volume than substance, some scholars have concluded that significant progress is being realized in state-level land-use regulation in the United States. In truth, more time must pass before a definitive evaluation of the more comprehensive efforts can be made. In this critical paper I examine the statewide growth-management legislation of the four states having tripartite (local—regional—state) administrative hierarchies: Florida, Vermont, Maine, and Georgia. There and elsewhere, numerous structural compromises have won adoption. Bold declarations of regulatory intent are found here often to be wrapped around ambiguous and easily subverted administrative mechanisms and standards. With prima facie evidence of significant structural shortcomings in hand, I then restore focus on the founding debates in search of a synthesis that might be more supportive of regional growth management. Using the theory of local autonomy as a starting point, I disentangle the normative foundations of the Liberal ethic of local participation and ‘control’, and of private rights in property. The centralization of growth management is seen by its proponents as a means to regionalize the ‘public interest’ in land use, positing a new and more expansive norm defining the public's interest in private property. Opponents, on the other hand, resist the public encumbrance of private land, and find in centralization a regionalized ‘public’ desirous of greater control and less amenable to private influence. In these opposing views, however, lies the possibility of less conflicted, more efficacious regional growth-management enactments. Centralization, I conclude, can actually deepen the capacity for ‘local’ participation yet at the same time extend its domain to matters of regional concern. The result can improve the capability of the local state to manage spillovers, achieve more sustainable patterns of growth, and facilitate more satisfactory templates of private investment and equity accumulation.

Cost-benefit analysis of AR-V7 testing in patients (Pts) with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) eligible for abiraterone (Abi) or enzalutamide (Enza).

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 283-283
Author(s):  
Mark Christopher Markowski ◽  
Kevin D. Frick ◽  
James R. Eshleman ◽  
Jun Luo ◽  
Emmanuel S. Antonarakis
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
The Us ◽  
Effective Option ◽  
Current Price ◽  
Societal Challenge ◽  
The Cost

283 Background: The rising cost of oncology care in the US is an ongoing societal challenge, and identifying biomarkers that inform clinical decisions and reduce the use of ineffective therapies remains elusive. A splice variant of the androgen receptor, AR-V7, was found to confer resistance to Abi and Enza in men with mCRPC, but did not negatively affect responses to taxanes, suggesting that early use of chemotherapy may be a more effective option for AR-V7(+) pts. With the recent development of a CLIA-certified clinical assay for AR-V7 at Johns Hopkins, we hypothesized that AR-V7 testing in mCRPC pts may result in cost savings by avoiding futile treatment with Abi/Enza in men with AR-V7(+) disease. Methods: We calculated the cost savings of performing AR-V7 testing in mCRPC pts prior to starting Abi/Enza (and avoiding these drugs in AR-V7(+) men) versus treating all mCRPC pts with Abi/Enza (without use of the biomarker). We have set the cost of the AR-V7 assay at $1000. The cost of 3 months of Abi/Enza (the minimum time it would take to determine resistance, clinically) was approximated at $20,000. We estimated that 30,000 mCRPC pts per year are eligible for Abi/Enza in the US. Results: In our prior studies, about 30% of mCRPC pts previously treated with Abi/Enza had detectable AR-V7 in CTCs. Assuming an AR-V7 prevalence of 30%, about 9,000 AR-V7(+) mCRPC pts per year would receive ineffective treatment with Abi/Enza, at an estimated cost of $180 Million. The upfront cost of testing all mCRPC pts who are Abi/Enza-eligible for AR-V7 is $30 Million, resulting in a net cost savings of $150 Million. When performing a continuous cost-benefit analysis after assuming other prevalences of AR-V7 (ranging from 4% to 50%) and a range of costs for Abi/Enza ($2000 to $24,000 per 3 months), we determined that AR-V7 testing would result in a cost savings as long as the prevalence of AR-V7 is > 5% (if the cost of 3 months of Abi/Enza remains at $20,000). Conclusions: AR-V7 testing in mCRPC pts (at $1000/test) is cost-beneficial when considering the current price of Abi/Enza, and may reduce the ineffective use of Abi/Enza leading to a net cost savings to the healthcare system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document