IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jbcoan/v1y2010i1p1-40_6.html

An Assessment of Important Issues Concerning the Application of Benefit-Cost Analysis to Social Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Vining, Aidan
  • Weimer, David L

Abstract

Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) provides a framework for systematically assessing the efficiency of public policies. Increasingly, BCA is being applied to social policies, ranging from preschool interventions to prison reentry programs. These applications offer great potential for helping to identify policies that offer the best returns on public investments aimed at helping the disadvantaged or otherwise improving social life. However, applying BCA to social policies pose a number of challenges. The need for a comprehensive approach to assessing social policies generally requires making predictions based on data from multiple sources and using available shadow prices. As these predictions and shadow prices are inherently uncertain, special effort must be made to explicitly address the resulting uncertainty of predictions of net benefits. Prediction and valuation are complicated by behaviors, such as addiction, that do not clearly satisfy the assumptions of neoclassical welfare economics. As distributional goals are often an explicit motivation for social policies, BCA may be an incomplete framework for public policy purposes unless analysts can find ways to incorporate people's willingness to pay for changes in the distribution of consumption across society. If BCA is to reach its potential for contributing to good social policy, analysts must be aware of these challenges and researchers must help address them.

Suggested Citation

  • Vining, Aidan & Weimer, David L, 2010. "An Assessment of Important Issues Concerning the Application of Benefit-Cost Analysis to Social Policy," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 1-40, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jbcoan:v:1:y:2010:i:1:p:1-40_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2194588800000105/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elizabeth M. Ashley & Clark Nardinelli & Rosemarie A. Lavaty, 2015. "Estimating the Benefits of Public Health Policies that Reduce Harmful Consumption," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(5), pages 617-624, May.
    2. Victoria Schoen & Silvio Caputo & Chris Blythe, 2020. "Valuing Physical and Social Output: A Rapid Assessment of a London Community Garden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    3. Marian Shanahan & Alison Ritter, 2014. "Cost Benefit Analysis of Two Policy Options for Cannabis: Status Quo and Legalisation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-12, April.
    4. Xiaoling Zhu & Hio-Jung Shin, 2021. "Financial Analysis for Improving River Water Quality through Introduction of Organic Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    5. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Aidan R. Vining & David L. Weimer, 2019. "The Value of High School Graduation in the United States: Per-Person Shadow Price Estimates for Use in Cost–Benefit Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, October.
    7. Gray, David & Morin, Louis-Philippe, 2013. "An analysis of a foundational learning program in BC: the Foundations Workplace Skills Program (FWSP) at Douglas College," CLSSRN working papers clsrn_admin-2013-41, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 26 Sep 2013.
    8. Massimo Baldini & Giovanni Gallo & Marco Ranuzzini, 2018. "Rapporto Conclusivo dell’Indagine Valutativa su Portobello – Emporio Sociale di Modena," Center for the Analysis of Public Policies (CAPP) 0165, Universita di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Dipartimento di Economia "Marco Biagi".
    9. Aidan R. Vining & David L. Weimer, 2013. "An assessment of important issues concerning the application of benefit–cost analysis to social policy," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 1, pages 25-62, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Francesco Ramponi & Simon Walker & Susan Griffin & Steve Parrott & Colin Drummond & Paolo Deluca & Simon Coulton & Mona Kanaan & Gerry Richardson, 2021. "Cost‐effectiveness analysis of public health interventions with impacts on health and criminal justice: An applied cross‐sectoral analysis of an alcohol misuse intervention," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 972-988, May.
    11. Jones, Michael, 2017. "The Effect of Job Readiness Programs on Criminal Behavior," MPRA Paper 81908, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Karoly Lynn A., 2012. "Toward Standardization of Benefit-Cost Analysis of Early Childhood Interventions," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-45, January.
    13. Kabir, Md. Jahangir & Gaydon, Donald S. & Cramb, Rob, 2025. "Evaluation of crop and pond-deepening adaptations to climate change in saline coastal Bangladesh: Benefit-cost and risk analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    14. Courard-Hauri David & Lauer Stephen A., 2012. "Taking "All Men Are Created Equal" Seriously: Toward a Metric for the Intergroup Comparison of Utility Functions Through Life Values," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-30, August.
    15. Giulio Ecchia & Chris O'Leary & Luciano Messori, 2021. "Ex‐ante socio‐economic impact assessment for a social science research infrastructure: The case of EuroCohort," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(3), pages 531-563, September.
    16. Lynn A. Karoly, 2013. "Toward standardization of benefit–cost analysis of early childhood interventions," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 2, pages 63-109, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Aidan R. Vining, 2016. "What Is Public Agency Strategic Analysis (PASA) and How Does It Differ from Public Policy Analysis and Firm Strategy Analysis?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-31, December.
    18. Lin, Dajun & Lutter, Randall & Ruhm, Christopher J., 2018. "Cognitive performance and labour market outcomes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 121-135.
    19. Francisco Alcon & Julia Martin-Ortega & Francisco Pedrero & Juan Alarcon & M. Miguel, 2013. "Incorporating Non-market Benefits of Reclaimed Water into Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Case Study of Irrigated Mandarin Crops in southern Spain," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(6), pages 1809-1820, April.
    20. Novikova, Tatyana S., 2022. "Investments in research infrastructure on the project level: Problems, methods and mechanisms," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    21. Håkansson, Cecilia & Östberg, Katarina & Bostedt, Göran, 2012. "Estimating Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy in Swedish Coastal Environments – A Walk along different Socio-economic Dimensions," CERE Working Papers 2012:18, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.

    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:1:y:2010:i:1:p:1-40_6. 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.