Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Designing Smarter Regulation with Improved Benefit-Cost Analysis

Contents:

Author Info

  • Hahn Robert

    (University of Manchester)

Abstract

Benefit-cost analysis is required for many regulatory decisions in the United States and in other countries. In this paper, I examine a standard textbook model that is used in benefit-cost analysis as it is actually applied to environmental policy and other areas of regulation. My primary objective is to suggest how including some key factors in the analysis could promote the development of smarter regulation.I begin by presenting a standard economic model for government intervention in markets, which balances benefits and a narrow definition of costs. I then introduce a richer normative theory that considers several political and economic costs that are frequently not considered in analyzing real-world applications. Examples include costs associated with rent seeking, design and implementation, and raising revenues. The richer theory suggests that the government should supply less of a good, or ask the private sector to provide less of that good, than the standard economic model suggests. The reason is that intervening in markets is often more costly than the standard model assumes. In special cases, the theory provides guidance on the setting of socially optimal taxes and subsidies. I then explore how the theory needs to be modified in the presence of biased estimates of benefits and costs. I conclude with a discussion of how the theoretical framework can be applied to the actual design of regulatory policy.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jbca.2010.1.1/jbca.2010.1.1.1000/jbca.2010.1.1.1000.xml?format=INT
Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by De Gruyter in its journal Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis.

Volume (Year): 1 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (July)
Pages: 1-19

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:bpj:jbcacn:v:1:y:2010:i:1:n:5

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.degruyter.com

Order Information:
Web: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jbca

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Stephan Marette & Jutta Roosen & Sandrine Blanchemanche, 2011. "The Combination of lab and field experiments for benefit-cost analysis," Working Papers 40757, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, France.
  2. Philip E. Graves, 2010. "Benefit-Cost Analysis of Environmental Projects: A Plethora of Systematic Biases," CESifo Working Paper Series 3144, CESifo Group Munich.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jbcacn:v:1:y:2010:i:1:n:5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.