IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v41y2022i4p1157-1176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Standing in Cost‐Benefit Analysis: Where, Who, What (Counts)?

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony E. Boardman
  • David H. Greenberg
  • Aidan R. Vining
  • David L. Weimer

Abstract

Whose costs and benefits should count in cost‐benefit analysis (CBA)? This is an important practical question requiring answers for analysts because most government agencies offer only permissive or vague guidance. Drawing primarily on foundational CBA principles, we present a conceptual framework for specifying standing to answer three important boundary questions: Where? Who? What? First, a standing framework requires a definition of jurisdictional boundaries (the “where” question), whether national, subnational, or supranational. Second, a framework should be clear about which persons within the jurisdiction have standing (the “who” question). For example, should undocumented residents have standing? Third, the framework requires clarity on the standing of certain individual preferences (the “what” question), such as for harmfully addictive private or public goods that express “moral sentiments,” or when choices do not maximize the value of consumption. We seek to provide guidance for CBA practice within this framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony E. Boardman & David H. Greenberg & Aidan R. Vining & David L. Weimer, 2022. "Standing in Cost‐Benefit Analysis: Where, Who, What (Counts)?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 1157-1176, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:41:y:2022:i:4:p:1157-1176
    DOI: 10.1002/pam.22397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22397
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pam.22397?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Zerbe, 2004. "Should moral sentiments be incorporated into benefit-cost analysis? An example of long-term discounting," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(3), pages 305-318, December.
    2. Dale Whittington & Duncan Macrae, 1990. "Comment: Judgments about who has standing in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 536-547.
    3. Ted Gayer & W. Viscusi, 2013. "Overriding consumer preferences with energy regulations," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 248-264, June.
    4. Richard O. Zerbe, 1991. "Comment: Does benefit cost analysis stand alone? rights and standing," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 96-105.
    5. Abelson, Peter, 2020. "A Partial Review of Seven Official Guidelines for Cost-Benefit Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 272-293, July.
    6. RonaldB. Mitchell & LilianaB. Andonova & Mark Axelrod & Jörg Balsiger & Thomas Bernauer & JessicaF. Green & James Hollway & RakhyunE. Kim & Jean-Frédéric Morin, 2020. "What We Know (and Could Know) About International EnvironmentalAgreements," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(1), pages 103-121, February.
    7. Buchanan, James M, 1975. "A Contractarian Paradigm for Applying Economic Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(2), pages 225-230, May.
    8. William N. Trumbull, 1990. "Reply to whittington and macRae," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 548-550.
    9. Paul A. Samuelson, 1956. "Social Indifference Curves," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 1-22.
    10. John C. Harsanyi, 1953. "Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-taking," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61, pages 434-434.
    11. Vining, Aidan R. & Moore, Mark A., 2017. "Potash ownership and extraction: Between a rock and a hard place in Saskatchewan," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 71-80.
    12. Camerer, Colin F, 1987. "Do Biases in Probability Judgment Matter in Markets? Experimental Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 981-997, December.
    13. Murtazashvili, Ilia & Murtazashvili, Jennifer, 2016. "The origins of private property rights: states or customary organizations?," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 105-128, March.
    14. James Buchanan, 1990. "The domain of constitutional economics," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Carlson, Deven E. & Ripberger, Joseph T. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Gupta, Kuhika & Berrens, Robert P. & Jones, Benjamin A., 2016. "Contingent Valuation and the Policymaking Process: An Application to Used Nuclear Fuel in the United States," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 459-487, October.
    16. David A. Long & Charles D. Mallar & Craig Thornton, 1981. "Evaluating the Benefits and Costs of the Job Corps," Mathematica Policy Research Reports ba3a91e82f5f43b48bab18ea4, Mathematica Policy Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dale Whittington & Richard T. Carson & Thomas Sterner, 2023. "Policy Note: Benefit Cost Analysis of Water Investments in the Anthropocene," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-23, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dale Whittington & Richard T. Carson & Thomas Sterner, 2023. "Policy Note: Benefit Cost Analysis of Water Investments in the Anthropocene," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-23, July.
    2. Campbell, Harry F. & Brown, Richard P.C., 2005. "A multiple account framework for cost-benefit analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 23-32.
    3. Ulrich Witt & Christian Schubert, 2008. "Constitutional interests in the face of innovations: how much do we need to know about risk preferences?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 203-225, September.
    4. Darcy W E Allen, 2020. "When Entrepreneurs Meet:The Collective Governance of New Ideas," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number q0269, December.
    5. Richard O. Zerbe, 2013. "Ethical benefit–cost analysis as art and science: ten rules for benefit–cost analysis," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 8, pages 264-293, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Alain Marciano, 2007. "Value and exchange in law and economics: Buchanan versus posner," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 20(2), pages 187-200, September.
    7. Alain Marciano, 2009. "Buchanan’s constitutional political economy: exchange vs. choice in economics and in politics," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 42-56, March.
    8. Richard O. Zerbe, 1998. "Is cost-benefit analysis legal? Three rules," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 419-456.
    9. Richard O. Zerbe, 1991. "Comment: Does benefit cost analysis stand alone? rights and standing," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 96-105.
    10. Davies, Clem & Franke, Marcel & Kuang, Lida & Neumärker, Karl Justus Bernhard, 2022. "A contractarian view on homann's ethical approach: The vision of "new ordoliberalism"," The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers 01-2022, University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory.
    11. Petrick, Martin, 2008. "Theoretical and methodological topics in the institutional economics of European agriculture. With applications to farm organisation and rural credit arrangements," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 45, number 92318.
    12. Gramzow, Andreas, 2009. "Rural development as provision of local public goods: Theory and evidence from Poland," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 51, number 92313.
    13. Frimpong Boamah, Emmanuel, 2018. "Constitutional economics of Ghana’s decentralization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 256-267.
    14. Jennifer Roberts & Karl Taylor, 2017. "Intra-household commuting choices and local labour markets," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 734-757.
    15. Andonie, Costel & Kuzmics, Christoph & Rogers, Brian W., 2019. "Efficiency-based measures of inequality," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 60-69.
    16. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 40, pages 576-588, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Elodie Brahic & Jean-Michel Salles, 2008. "La question de l’équité dans l’allocation initiale des permis d’émission dans le cadre des politiques de prévention du changement climatique : Une étude quasi-expérimentale," Working Papers 08-11, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jul 2008.
    18. Omer F. Baris, 2018. "Timing effect in bargaining and ex ante efficiency of the relative utilitarian solution," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 547-556, June.
    19. Smith, Lisa C. & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 1999. "Supply response of West African agricultural households," FCND discussion papers 69, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Benjamin Enke & Florian Zimmermann, 2019. "Correlation Neglect in Belief Formation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 313-332.

    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:wly:jpamgt:v:41:y:2022:i:4:p:1157-1176. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.