IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp15573.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Three Criteria for Evaluating Social Programs

Author

Listed:
  • García, Jorge Luis

    (Clemson University)

  • Heckman, James J.

    (University of Chicago)

Abstract

This paper examines the economic foundations of three criteria used for evaluating the costs and benefits of social programs. Some criteria do not consider the scale of programs or address the costs associated with programs that expand or contract the total government budget. A recent addition to the list of evaluation criteria—the marginal value of public funds (MVPF)—does not adopt a social optimality perspective. It evaluates the optimality of expenditures assuming a predetermined aggregate budget without considering the social costs of raising that budget.

Suggested Citation

  • García, Jorge Luis & Heckman, James J., 2022. "Three Criteria for Evaluating Social Programs," IZA Discussion Papers 15573, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp15573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp15573.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jorge Luis Garcia & Frederik Bennhoff & Duncan Ermini Leaf & James J. Heckman, 2021. "The Dynastic Benefits of Early Childhood Education," Working Papers 2021-033, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    2. Martin S. Feldstein, 1964. "Net Social Benefit Calculation And The Public Investment Decision," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 114-131.
    3. Martin Feldstein, 1999. "Tax Avoidance And The Deadweight Loss Of The Income Tax," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(4), pages 674-680, November.
    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. Spencer Bastani, 2023. "The Marginal Cost of Public Funds: A Brief Guide," CESifo Working Paper Series 10322, CESifo.

    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. Niels Johannesen & Thomas Tørsløv & Ludvig Wier, 2016. "Are less developed countries more exposed to multinational tax avoidance? Method and evidence from micro-data," WIDER Working Paper Series 010, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Slemrod, Joel, 1998. "Methodological Issues in Measuring and Interpreting Taxable Income Elasticities," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 4), pages 773-88, December.
    3. David S. Lee & Pauline Leung & Christopher J. O’Leary & Zhuan Pei & Simon Quach, 2021. "Are Sufficient Statistics Necessary? Nonparametric Measurement of Deadweight Loss from Unemployment Insurance," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(S2), pages 455-506.
    4. Bas Jacobs, 2002. "An investigation of education finance reform; graduate taxes and income contingent loans in the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 9.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    5. Parry, Ian W. H., 2002. "Funding transportation spending in metropolitan Washington, DC: the costs of alternative revenue sources," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 362-390, September.
    6. Seng-Eun Choi, 2014. "Is Self-Employment Income More Responsive to Income Tax Rate?," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 30, pages 67-84.
    7. Mauro Mastrogiacomo & Nicole M. Bosch & Miriam D. A. C. Gielen & Egbert L. W. Jongen, 2017. "Heterogeneity in Labour Supply Responses: Evidence from a Major Tax Reform," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 79(5), pages 769-796, October.
    8. Shih‐Ying Wu, 2005. "The Tax Effect on Taxable Income from Privately Held Businesses," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(4), pages 891-912, April.
    9. Miguel Almunia & David Lopez-Rodriguez, 2019. "The elasticity of taxable income in Spain: 1999–2014," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 281-320, November.
    10. Alejandro Esteller & Amedeo Piolatto & Matthew D. Rablen, 2016. "Taxing high-income earners: tax avoidance and mobility," IFS Working Papers W16/07, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    11. Austan Goolsbee, 1998. "It's Not About the Money: Why Natural Experiments Don't Work on the Rich," NBER Working Papers 6395, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Parry, Ian, 2015. "Designing Fiscal Policy to Address the External Costs of Energy," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 8(1), pages 1-56, May.
    13. Jacob, Martin, 2014. "Cross-base tax elasticity of capital gains," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 169, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    14. Ian W.H. Parry & Antonio M. Bento, 2002. "Tax Deductions, Environmental Policy, and the "Double Dividend" Hypothesis," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 22, pages 397-426, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. John Creedy & Norman Gemmell, 2020. "The elasticity of taxable income of individuals in couples," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(4), pages 931-950, August.
    16. Jongen, Egbert L. W. & Stoel, Maaike, 2019. "The Elasticity of Taxable Labour Income in the Netherlands," IZA Discussion Papers 12090, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cost-benefit analysis; marginal value of public funds;

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:iza:izadps:dp15573. 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: Holger Hinte (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.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.