IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Discounting in Cost-benefit Analysis

Listed author(s):
  • Szabolcs Szekeres


    (IID Kft., Budapest)

Registered author(s):

    There is much disagreement about the discount rate. The prescriptive approach derives the discount rate from utility functions, growth models and ethical considerations. The descriptive approach stresses the opportunity cost of capital, but struggles to define which market rates to average. Both use social (shadow) discount rates to compensate for capital market distortions. Others propose discount rates declining through time. This paper argues that it is wrong to use shadow discount rates because they cannot ensure the efficient allocation of public funds nor correct for capital market distortions. Instead the marginal cost of public sector funds should be used for discounting and the shadow price of capital should be used to adjust for distortions. No other discount rate will lead to correct cost-benefit analysis results. This paper argues that discounting and inter-temporal distribution weighting are not equivalent, and that the former is required for correct cost-benefit analysis results. It argues further that discount rates should not be declining; and that the requirements for robustness of conclusions and the partial equilibrium nature of cost-benefit analysis limit the scope of its applicability.

    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:
    Download Restriction: subscription

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary in its journal Society and Economy.

    Volume (Year): 33 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 2 (August)
    Pages: 361-385

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:aka:soceco:v:33:y:2011:i:2:p:361-385
    Note: I am grateful to Elio Londero, whose many questions and doubts helped to focus and improve the arguments presented.
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal: Akadémiai Kiadó Zrt., Prielle K. u. 21-35. Budapest, 1117, Hungary
    Web: Email:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aka:soceco:v:33:y:2011:i:2:p:361-385. 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: (Vajda, Lőrinc)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.