Using Environmental Benefit-Cost Analysis to Improve Government Performance
AbstractIn this paper we first describe the legal and administrative basis of mandates that variously require and eschew economic measures for environmental management. We then summarize the steps involved in benefit-cost analysis and what can and cannot be accomplished with such information. Our basic conclusion is that while the approach is not perfect, benefit-cost analysis has a solid methodological footing and provides a valuable performance measure for an important governmental function, improving the well-being of society. However, benefit-cost analysis requires analytical judgements which, if done poorly, can obfuscate an issue or worse, provide a refuge for scoundrels in the policy debate. We conclude the paper with specific suggestions for both the everyday performance of benefit-cost analysis and its use in policy decision-making.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Resources For the Future in its series Discussion Papers with number dp-99-11.
Date of creation: 01 Dec 1998
Date of revision:
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Morrall III, John F., 2003. "Saving Lives: A Review of the Record," Working paper 188, Regulation2point0.
- Farrow, Scott, 2001. "Improving Regulatory Performance: Does Executive Office Oversight Matter?," Working paper 77, Regulation2point0.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.