Gains, Losses, and the US-EPA Economic Analyses Guidelines: A Hazardous Product?
While offering many useful suggestions to improve economic analyses, the Guidelines take no account of widely reported behavioural economics research findings. Foregoing the opportunities to improve valuations and other analyses offered by this evidence is likely to lead to inappropriate assessments and consequent distortions of damage estimates, policy and regulatory design. Copyright Springer 2005
Volume (Year): 32 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (09)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Arrow, Kenneth J. & Cropper, Maureen L. & Eads, George C. & Hahn, Robert W. & Lave, Lester B. & Noll, Roger G. & Portney, Paul R. & Russell, Milson & Schmalensee, Richard & Smith, V. Kerry & Stavins, , 1997. "Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(02), pages 195-221, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:32:y:2005:i:1:p:91-112. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.