scholarly journals Managing Leadership in the Indo-Pacific: The United States’ South Asia Strategy Revisited

2017 ◽  
Vol 03 (04) ◽  
pp. 463-480
Author(s):  
Xiaoping Yang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Asia ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
Conditional Cooperation ◽  
United States South ◽  
Strategic Objective

The United States’ South Asia strategy has been based on the calculation of its overall national security priorities. In practice, when U.S. priorities are at odds with those of other regional powers, Washington tends to adopt a “no-expectations” psychological approach toward its regional partners to avoid disappointment, a technical “de-hyphenation strategy” to improve policy efficiency, and practical cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of its South Asia strategy. However, Washington often has to come to terms with the realities on the ground with regard to its leadership role in South Asia. For the time being, Washington has articulated its strategic objective in South Asia, that is, a regional balance of power in favor of the United States vis-a-vis its perceived competitor, China. Therefore, it has conducted conditional cooperation with Pakistan and Afghanistan on land, and committed support for India on security issues in the Indian Ocean, so as to hedge against China’s growing presence in South Asia. The enhancement of U.S.-India defense and security cooperation has fueled China’s suspicion of India’s intention to join the U.S.-led coalition against it. By the logic of balance of power, the United States will continue to regard India as a strategic counterweight to China, which is likely to increase the possibility of strategic tensions and conflicts between China and India that may finally entangle the United States.

Inflation Inequality: Measurement, Causes, and Policy Implications

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Jaravel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
Interest Rates ◽  
Optimal Taxation ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Annual Review ◽  
Publication Date

Does inflation vary across the income distribution? This article reviews the growing literature on inflation inequality, describing recent advances and opportunities for further research in four areas. First, new price index theory facilitates the study of inflation inequality. Second, new data show that inflation rates decline with household income in the United States. Accurate measurement requires granular price and expenditure data because of aggregation bias. Third, new evidence quantifies the impacts of innovation and trade on inflation inequality. Contrary to common wisdom, empirical estimates show that the direction of innovation is a significant driver of inflation inequality in the United States, whereas trade has similar price effects across the income distribution. Fourth, inflation inequality and non-homotheticities have important policy implications. They transform cost-benefit analysis, optimal taxation, the effectiveness of stabilization policies, and our understanding of secular macroeconomic trends—including structural change, the decline in the labor share and interest rates, and labor market polarization. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Economics, Volume 13 is August 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

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.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Potential Supervised Injection Facility in San Francisco, California, USA

2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Irwin ◽  
Ehsan Jozaghi ◽  
Ricky N. Bluthenthal ◽  
Alex H. Kral
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Local Public Health ◽  
Supervised Injection ◽  
Overdose Deaths

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) have been shown to reduce infection, prevent overdose deaths, and increase treatment uptake. The United States is in the midst of an opioid epidemic, yet no sanctioned SIF currently operates in the United States. We estimate the economic costs and benefits of establishing a potential SIF in San Francisco using mathematical models that combine local public health data with previous research on the effects of existing SIFs. We consider potential savings from five outcomes: averted HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections, reduced skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI), averted overdose deaths, and increased medication-assisted treatment (MAT) uptake. We find that each dollar spent on a SIF would generate US$2.33 in savings, for total annual net savings of US$3.5 million for a single 13-booth SIF. Our analysis suggests that a SIF in San Francisco would not only be a cost-effective intervention but also a significant boost to the public health system.

scholarly journals Cost-benefit Analysis of Maintaining a Fully Stocked Malignant Hyperthermia Cart versus an Initial Dantrolene Treatment Dose for Maternity Units

2018 ◽  
Vol 129 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phi T. Ho ◽  
Brendan Carvalho ◽  
Eric C. Sun ◽  
Alex Macario ◽  
Edward T. Riley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Malignant Hyperthermia ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Maternity Unit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
General Anesthetic ◽  
Tree Model

Abstract What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New Background The Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States recommends that dantrolene be available for administration within 10 min. One approach to dantrolene availability is a malignant hyperthermia cart, stocked with dantrolene, other drugs, and supplies. However, this may not be of cost benefit for maternity units, where triggering agents are rarely used. Methods The authors performed a cost-benefit analysis of maintaining a malignant hyperthermia cart versus a malignant hyperthermia cart readily available within the hospital versus an initial dantrolene dose of 250 mg, on every maternity unit in the United States. A decision-tree model was used to estimate the expected number of lives saved, and this benefit was compared against the expected costs of the policy. Results We found that maintaining a malignant hyperthermia cart in every maternity unit in the United States would reduce morbidity and mortality costs by $3,304,641 per year nationally but would cost $5,927,040 annually. Sensitivity analyses showed that our results were largely driven by the extremely low incidence of general anesthesia. If cesarean delivery rates in the United States remained at 32% of all births, the general anesthetic rate would have to be greater than 11% to achieve cost benefit. The only cost-effective strategy is to keep a 250-mg dose of dantrolene on the unit for starting therapy. Conclusions It is not of cost benefit to maintain a fully stocked malignant hyperthermia cart with a full supply of dantrolene within 10 min of maternity units. We recommend that hospitals institute alternative strategies (e.g., maintain a small supply of dantrolene on the maternity unit for starting treatment).

scholarly journals The benefits of coronavirus suppression: A cost-benefit analysis of the response to the first wave of COVID-19 in the United States

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. e0252729
Author(s):  
James Broughel ◽  
Michael Kotrous
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Total Production ◽  
Economic Output ◽  
At Risk Populations ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
Benefits And Costs

This paper estimates the benefits and costs of state suppression policies to “bend the curve” during the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in the United States. We employ an approach that values benefits and costs in terms of additions or subtractions to total production. Relative to a baseline in which only the infected and at-risk populations mitigate the spread of coronavirus, we estimate that total benefits of suppression policies to economic output are between $632.5 billion and $765.0 billion from early March 2020 to August 1, 2020. Relative to private mitigation, output lost due to suppression policies is estimated to be between $214.2 billion and $331.5 billion. The cost estimate is based on the duration of nonessential business closures and stay-at-home orders, which were enforced between 42 and 65 days. Our results indicate that the net benefits of suppression policies to slow the spread of COVID-19 are positive and may be substantial. We discuss uncertainty surrounding several parameters and employ alternative methods for valuing mortality benefits, which also suggest that suppression measures had positive net benefits.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document