The Role of Benefit-Cost Analysis in Fish and Wildlife Programs

2019 ◽  
pp. 53-63
Author(s):  
Lawrence E. Lynn
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost

Accounting for the Distribution of Benefits and Costs in Benefit–Cost Analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
James K. Hammitt
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Policy Choice ◽  
Alternative Evaluation ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Transfer Programs ◽  
Net Benefits ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Benefits And Costs

Abstract Benefit–cost analysis (BCA) is often viewed as measuring the efficiency of a policy independent of the distribution of its consequences. The role of distributional effects on policy choice is disputed; either: (a) the policy that maximizes net benefits should be selected and distributional concerns should be addressed through other measures, such as tax and transfer programs or (b) BCA should be supplemented with distributional analysis and decision-makers should weigh efficiency and distribution in policy choice. The separation of efficiency and distribution is misleading. The measure of efficiency depends on the numéraire chosen for the analysis, whether monetary values or some other good (unless individuals have the same rates of substitution between them). The choice of numéraire is not neutral; it can affect the ranking of policies by calculated net benefits. Alternative evaluation methods, such as BCA using a different numéraire, weighted BCA, or a social welfare function (SWF), may better integrate concerns about distribution and efficiency. The most appropriate numéraire, distributional weights, or SWFs cannot be measured or statistically estimated; it is a normative choice.

scholarly journals The role of value added in benefit/cost analysis

1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Cooke
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost

A Statistical Analysis of the Role of Benefit–Cost Analysis in Awarding TIGER Grants

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony C. Homan ◽  
Teresa M. Adams ◽  
Alex J. Marach
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost

High-Speed Rail in Portugal

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-37
Author(s):  
David Besanko ◽  
João Tenreiro Gonçalves
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
High Speed ◽  
Polio Eradication ◽  
Global Public Good ◽  
List Type ◽  
High Speed Rail ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Benefit Cost ◽  
Development And Management

Rede Alta Velocidade, SA (RAVE), the state-owned company responsible for planning and developing a major high-speed rail project in Portugal, must persuade both public officials and lenders that the project is worth undertaking. It must also make a recommendation on the appropriate organizational form for the enterprise. Specifically, it must determine the role of the Portuguese government in financing and operating the high-speed rail network, with options ranging from full development and management of the project by the public sector to completely private development and management. Lying in between these two polar cases were a variety of hybrid models, often referred to as public-private partnerships (PPPs). Using data in the case, students have the opportunity to perform a benefit-cost analysis of the project. They also must think carefully about the optimal role of the government in a major new infrastructure project.After analyzing and discussing the case, students will be able to: Understand the nature of a global public good Perform a back-of-the-envelope benefit-cost analysis of polio eradication Discuss the appropriate strategy for eradicating an infectious disease Apply game theory to analyzing which countries would be likely to contribute funds toward global polio eradication Discuss the role of private organizations in the provision of global public goods

Bureaucratic Benefit-Cost Analysis and Policy Controversy

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 350-371
Author(s):  
Ryan P. Scott ◽  
Tyler A. Scott ◽  
Richard Zerbe
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Standard Assumption ◽  
Benefit Cost Analysis ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Benefit Cost

Critiques of benefit-cost analysis (BCA) are usually made on theoretical or methodological grounds; however, understanding how BCA is actually used in decision-making processes is critical if BCA is to inform policy-making. Our paper examines how the implementation of BCA within policy decision-making processes can serve to increase, rather than alleviate, controversy. This runs contrary to the standard assumption that BCA improves decision-making by providing objective data that serves as a basis for policy consensus. To frame this issue, we engage the literature on the role of science in policy decisions and the role of bureaucrats in understanding and implementing policy research. We introduce the concept of “Bureaucratic BCA” as a framework for the practical application of BCA; Bureaucratic BCA does not refer to BCA specifically conducted by bureaucrats or a lesser, technically inferior version of BCA, but rather acknowledges that BCA plays an interactive role within bureaucratic decision-making processes rather than simply serving as a sterilized information input. We show how the dynamics of BCA within the policy process can make BCA a source of controversy and waste rather than an aid to policy efficiency. In light of the Bureaucratic BCA framework, we provide recommendations as to how BCA can be implemented more productively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document