IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v28y2005i1p23-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multiple account framework for cost-benefit analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Campbell, Harry F.
  • Brown, Richard P.C.

Abstract

The paper presents a spreadsheet-based multiple account approach to cost-benefit analysis which incorporates all the usual concerns of cost-benefit analysts such as shadow-pricing to account for market failure, distribution of net benefits, sensitivity and risk analysis, cost of public funds, and environmental effects. The approach offers a number of advantages to both analysts and decision-makers, including transparency, a check on internal consistency and a detailed summary of project net benefits disaggregated by stakeholder group.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Campbell, Harry F. & Brown, Richard P.C., 2005. "A multiple account framework for cost-benefit analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 23-32.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:28:y:2005:i:1:p:23-32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(04)00076-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William N. Trumbull, 1990. "Reply to whittington and macRae," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 548-550.
    2. Dale Whittington & Duncan Macrae, 1990. "Comment: Judgments about who has standing in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 536-547.
    3. Dale Whittington & Duncan MacRae, 1986. "The issue of standing in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(4), pages 665-682.
    4. Willig, Robert D, 1976. "Consumer's Surplus without Apology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 589-597, September.
    5. Campbell, H F & Bond, K A, 1997. "The Cost of Public Funds in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 73(220), pages 22-34, March.
    6. Richard O. Zerbe, 1991. "Comment: Does benefit cost analysis stand alone? rights and standing," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 96-105.
    7. William N. Trumbull, 1990. "Who has standing in cost-benefit analysis?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 201-218.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lawrence, C, 2009. "Identifying an Australian 'Shadow' Benefit / Cost Ratio for Public Projects," MPRA Paper 13336, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Mushtaq, Shahbaz & Khan, Shahbaz & Dawe, David & Hanjra, Munir A. & Hafeez, Mohsin & Asghar, Muhammad Nadeem, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of Tax-for-Fee reform (Fei Gai Shui) on water resources and agriculture production in the Zhanghe Irrigation System, China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 576-586, December.
    3. Grimaldi, Raffaele & Beria, Paolo, 2013. "Open issues in the practice of cost benefit analysis of transport projects," MPRA Paper 53766, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Byrnes, Liam & Brown, Colin & Wagner, Liam & Foster, John, 2016. "Reviewing the viability of renewable energy in community electrification: The case of remote Western Australian communities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 470-481.

    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:eee:epplan:v:28:y:2005:i:1:p:23-32. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.