Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Project Evaluations and Decision Processes

Contents:

Author Info

Abstract

Cost-benefit analysis have been attacked by many critics because of its implicit ethical assumptions. The normative content of the method is at odds with the common attitude that economists should analyze how to reach given goals, while determination of the goals should be left to the politicians. This paper presents a descriptive model of decision makers' behavior, demonstrating that rational, benevolent politicians will only in special cases accept the evaluation of projects resulting from a cost-benefit analysis. An alternative approach to project evaluation, which allows individual decision makers to rank projects in accordance with their own ethical views, is presented. In this framework, estimates of willingness to pay are generally not required. On the other hand, information about groups that are significantly affected by the project, as well as physical unit information on changes in the supply of public goods, is crucial.

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.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp_137.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Research Department of Statistics Norway in its series Discussion Papers with number 137.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Feb 1995
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:137

Contact details of provider:
Postal: P.O.Box 8131 Dep, N-0033 Oslo, Norway
Phone: (+47) 21 09 00 00
Fax: (+47) 21 09 49 73
Email:
Web page: http://www.ssb.no/en/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Cost-benefit analysis; welfare judgements; information constraint.;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

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. Kjell Brekke & Hilde LurĂ¥ & Karine Nyborg, 1996. "Allowing disagreement in evaluations of social welfare," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 303-324, October.

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:ssb:dispap:137. 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: (J Bruusgaard).

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.