Scitovsky Reversals and Efficiency Criteria in Policy Analysis
Lawyers and philosophers have used the Scitovsky paradox to discredit cost-benefit analyses. His paradox is used as a criticism of the potential compensation criterion. But the occurrence of reversals is severely limited. The Compensation Principle, even with its potential nature, requires that compensation actually could be paid. Based on many empirical cost-benefit studies, the actual cost of compensation, which includes transaction costs, can be large. The attempt at actual compensation could turn a highly desirable project into a highly undesirable one, as the benefit-cost ratio could change from greater than one to less than one. The proper justification for using BCA is the Pareto principle considered across a portfolio of projects not the Compensation Principle.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 6 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.degruyter.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jafio|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:bjafio:v:6:y:2008:i:2:n:3. 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: (Peter Golla)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.