Multi-Government Cost-Benefit Analysis: Shadow Prices and Incentives

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Florio

1980 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-77
Author(s):  
John Weiss

Ms. Tsakok (I) has done a useful job in summarising and commenting on the various estimates of shadow prices which appeared in the symposium on shadow pricing in Pakistan, published in the Summer 1979 issue of this Review. However, her discussion of my paper in the symposium (3) 1 is misleading regarding a number of points of detail, and, more seriously, obscures the general thrust of the argument. Considering the detailed points first, Ms. Tsakok is concerned with a comparison of the values of the key shadow prices given in the different studies as well as with the explanations for the variations between the different estimates. However, JW discusses not the estimation of a set of shadow prices for Pakistan, but the broader question of the implications of the use of an income-weighting system, described conventionally as 'social' analysis, in project appraisal. The shadow prices attributed to my work in Table I of Ms. Tsakok's paper (II are not in fact contained in JW. but are taken from an earlier mimeographed paper written in 1977. These shadow prices are preliminary estimates, which are not used in my more detailed study on cost benefit analysis in Pakistan [2]. Furthermore, It is strange to find these estimates cited, since they conflict with the analysis of JW, which is the paper under review.



1979 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-185
Author(s):  
Clive Bell ◽  
Siiantayanan Devarajan

An investment project has effects on the incomes of households, firms and government , not only directly through the value added produced by the project it9Cif, but also by inducing additional output through inter-industry linkages and expenditures out of the extra incomes accruing to its beneficiaries. The latter, sometimes called the "multiplier" or "downstream" effects of a project , have been discussed in some of the recent literature on social cost benefit analysis [6, II]. These contributions have been concerned with the "multiplier" or "downstream" effects of projects, and with the derivation of shadow prices which capture all such effects in full. If these shadow prices are correctly calculated, so it is asserted, then valuing a project 's direct inputs and outputs at these prices yields the right measure of its social profitability . This approach is in the spirit of, and consistent with , that of the various manuals on social cost• benefit analysis [9. 13, 16] .



2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert D. Cairns

Especially in developing countries, natural resources and the environment are not optimally managed. Even so, it is possible for green accounts based on current prices to measure the realized contributions of the environment to net product. The prices for use in the green accounts, however, are not necessarily shadow prices as would be recommended by cost–benefit analysis: in practice, green or comprehensive NNP is an approximation of an index of welfare. The fact that a linearization of generalized national income is used implies that disaggregated, partial-equilibrium models of resources are useful.







Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document