IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v55y1973i3p472-476..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Incongruity of Program Objectives and Project Evaluation: An Example from the Reclamation Program

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel W. Bromley
  • Bruce R. Beattie

Abstract

In public programs project evaluation is often based on an objective that is more specific than the general objectives of the program. In such situations, benefits may be underestimated. The magnitude of this underestimation is assessed for a proposed reclamation project in Southern Idaho.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel W. Bromley & Bruce R. Beattie, 1973. "On the Incongruity of Program Objectives and Project Evaluation: An Example from the Reclamation Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 55(3), pages 472-476.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:55:y:1973:i:3:p:472-476.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1239128
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Castle, Emery N. & Kelso, Maurice M. & Stevens, Joe B. & Stoevener, Herbert H., 1981. "PART III. Natural Resource Economics, 1946-75," AAEA Monographs, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, number 337228, january.
    2. Forsythe, G.A., 1975. "An Assessment Of The Role Of Insurance And Structural Measures In Flood Mitigation Planning," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 43(02), pages 1-23, June.
    3. H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2009. "Objective or Multi-Objective? Two Historically Competing Visions for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 3-23.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:55:y:1973:i:3:p:472-476.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.