IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jbcoan/v16y2025is2p315-325_12.html

Comparing the Draft and Final Circular A-4

Author

Listed:
  • Febrizio, Mark
  • Hay, Sarah
  • Xie, Zhoudan

Abstract

In April 2023, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published a draft of revisions to Circular A-4, the first changes proposed since its publication in 2003. Following a public comment period, OMB published the final revised Circular A-4 in November 2023. In this article, we provide a section-by-section comparison describing the similarities and differences between the April draft and the November revision of Circular A-4. Among other observations, we note that the revised Circular A-4 changes the default social rate of time preference from 1.7 to 2.0%, retains recommendations for using distributional weighting in benefit–cost analysis, and retains recommendations to use a global point of view when determining the spatial scope of the analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Febrizio, Mark & Hay, Sarah & Xie, Zhoudan, 2025. "Comparing the Draft and Final Circular A-4," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(S2), pages 315-325, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jbcoan:v:16:y:2025:i:s2:p:315-325_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2194588825100341/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jbcoan:v:16:y:2025:i:s2:p:315-325_12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bca .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.