IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jbcoan/v6y2015i02p369-399_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefit-Cost Analysis in the States: Status, Impact, and Challenges

Author

Listed:
  • White, Darcy
  • VanLandingham, Gary

Abstract

Although there is growing interest in applying benefit-cost analysis (BCA) to public policy questions, limited information is available on states’ use of this methodology. The nationwide assessment presented here begins to fill that void and finds that states and the District of Columbia are increasingly conducting BCAs and using the results to inform their policy choices. The numbers of reports released by the states and statutory mandates to conduct these studies increased substantially between 2008 and 2011. An analysis of the studies released by states shows that most lack some recommended technical features of rigorous BCA, but the reports are having a reported impact on state policy and budget decisions. Like other forms of policy research, BCA faces challenges including resource and data limitations, timing problems, and gaining policymaker buy-in for the approach and findings.

Suggested Citation

  • White, Darcy & VanLandingham, Gary, 2015. "Benefit-Cost Analysis in the States: Status, Impact, and Challenges," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 369-399, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jbcoan:v:6:y:2015:i:02:p:369-399_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2194588815000391/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.

    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:6:y:2015:i:02:p:369-399_00. 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.