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

Incorporating Equity in Regulatory and Benefit-Cost Analysis Using Risk Based Preferences

Contents:

Author Info

  • Scott Farrow

    ()
    (UMBC)

Abstract

Governmental guidance for regulatory and benefit-cost analysis is targeted for applied analysts. Existing Federal guidance recommends sensitivity analysis in general without being specific regarding the implicit distributional assumptions of standard benefit-cost analysis. Recommendations for Federal guidance are developed to: 1) better communicate expectations for distributional analysis, 2) develop guidance for descriptive statistics related to distributional issues, and 3) integrate Government published measures of inequality aversion and to evaluate compensation for identified sensitive populations. While such actions have a data collection and analysis cost, they may make the results of regulatory analysis more relevant by investigating both efficiency and equity measures.

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.umbc.edu/economics/wpapers/wp_09_117.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by UMBC Department of Economics in its series UMBC Economics Department Working Papers with number 09-117.

as in new window
Length: 21 pages
Date of creation: 01 Oct 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:umb:econwp:09117

Contact details of provider:
Postal: UMBC Department of Economics 1000 Hilltop Circle Baltimore MD 21250, USA
Phone: 410-455-2160
Fax: 410-455-1054
Web page: http://www.umbc.edu/economics
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Email:

Related research

Keywords: benefit; risk; equity; distribution; income;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Boadway, Robin W, 1974. "The Welfare Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 84(336), pages 926-39, December.
  2. Kerry Krutilla, 2005. "Using the Kaldor-Hicks tableau format for cost-benefit analysis and policy evaluation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 864-875.
  3. Don Fullerton, 2001. "A Framework to Compare Environmental Policies," NBER Working Papers 8420, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. repec:reg:rpubli:299 is not listed on IDEAS
  5. repec:reg:wpaper:299 is not listed on IDEAS
  6. Richard Layard & Guy Mayraz & Stephen J Nickell, 2007. "The marginal utility of income," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library 19745, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  7. Robert W. Hahn & Patrick M. Dudley, 2007. "How Well Does the U.S. Government Do Benefit-Cost Analysis?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 1(2), pages 192-211, Summer.
  8. A. Atkinson, 2008. "More on the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 277-283, September.
  9. Farrow, Scott, 1998. "Environmental equity and sustainability: rejecting the Kaldor-Hicks criteria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 183-188, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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:umb:econwp:09117. 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: (Christelle Viauroux).

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.