IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v37y2007i1p253-269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects

Author

Listed:
  • R. Turner

    ()

Abstract

This paper reviews the contemporary debate and the now long standing role of CBA in UK and European environmental policy appraisal (EPA) and looks forward to possible future applications. The position taken is that despite its limitations CBA still has an important part to play in EPA. However, with the increasingly ‘contested’ nature of environmental and related public policies and outcomes, its role will become less prescriptive and its findings more constrained by social justice and ethical imperatives. Future CBA is more likely to continue to flourish as a component in a wider policy analysis and decision support system. Whatever decision support system is eventually adopted, its value will be judged on how well it aids real policymakers operating iteratively in the non-linear real world political economy. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Suggested Citation

  • R. Turner, 2007. "Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 253-269, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:37:y:2007:i:1:p:253-269
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-007-9119-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-007-9119-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Bromley, Daniel W., 1990. "The ideology of efficiency: Searching for a theory of policy analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 86-107, July.
    3. List, John A. & Shogren, Jason F., 2002. "Calibration of Willingness-to-Accept," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 219-233, March.
    4. Gollier, Christian, 2002. "Discounting an uncertain future," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 149-166, August.
    5. Anil Markandya & Suzette Pedroso-Galinato, 2007. "How substitutable is natural capital?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 297-312, May.
    6. Burgess, Jacquelin & Clark, Judy & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. "Knowledges in action: an actor network analysis of a wetland agri-environment scheme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 119-132, October.
    7. Henrich, Joseph, 2004. "Cultural group selection, coevolutionary processes and large-scale cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 3-35, January.
    8. David Pearce, 1998. "Environmental Appraisal and Environmental Policy in the European Union," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 489-501, April.
    9. Ben Groom & Cameron Hepburn & Phoebe Koundouri & David Pearce, 2005. "Declining Discount Rates: The Long and the Short of it," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(4), pages 445-493, December.
    10. Nick Hanley & Jason Shogren, 2005. "Is Cost–Benefit Analysis Anomaly-Proof?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 13-24, September.
    11. Roy Brouwer & Neil Powe & R. Kerry Turner & Ian J. Bateman & Ian H. Langford, 1999. "Public Attitudes to Contingent Valuation and Public Consultation," Environmental Values, White Horse Press, vol. 8(3), pages 325-347, August.
    12. Macmillan, Douglas C. & Philip, Lorna & Hanley, Nick & Alvarez-Farizo, Begona, 2002. "Valuing the non-market benefits of wild goose conservation: a comparison of interview and group based approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 49-59, November.
    13. Turner, R. Kerry & Paavola, Jouni & Cooper, Philip & Farber, Stephen & Jessamy, Valma & Georgiou, Stavros, 2003. "Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 493-510, October.
    14. Spash, Clive L. & Hanley, Nick, 1995. "Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 191-208, March.
    15. John List, 2005. "Scientific Numerology, Preference Anomalies, and Environmental Policymaking," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 35-53, September.
    16. Heal, G., 1998. "Valuing the Future: Economic Theory and Sustainability," Papers 98-10, Columbia - Graduate School of Business.
    17. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    18. Roach, Brian & Wade, William W., 2006. "Policy evaluation of natural resource injuries using habitat equivalency analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 421-433, June.
    19. Weitzman, Martin L., 1998. "Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 201-208, November.
    20. Crowards, Tom M., 1998. "Safe Minimum Standards: costs and opportunities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 303-314, June.
    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. Nikolaos Thomopoulos & Susan Grant-Muller, 2013. "Incorporating equity as part of the wider impacts in transport infrastructure assessment: an application of the SUMINI approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 315-345, February.
    2. Agee, Mark D. & Crocker, Thomas D., 2013. "Operationalizing the capability approach to assessing well-being," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 80-86.
    3. Katie Johnson & Margaretha Breil, 2012. "Conceptualizing Urban Adaptation to Climate Change Findings from an Applied Adaptation Assessment Framework," Working Papers 2012.29, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Raffaelli, Roberta & Notaro, Sandra & Gios, Geremia, 2008. "Should carbon issues modify agri-environmental support to mountain grazing? A case study in the Italian Alps," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44071, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Cole, Scott, 2012. "Equity over Efficiency: A Problem of Credibility in Scaling Resource-Based Compensatory?," CERE Working Papers 2012:12, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    6. Clément, Valérie & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Rulleau, Bénédicte, 2015. "Perceptions on equity and responsibility in coastal zone policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 284-291.
    7. Nocera, Silvio & Tonin, Stefania & Cavallaro, Federico, 2015. "The economic impact of greenhouse gas abatement through a meta-analysis: Valuation, consequences and implications in terms of transport policy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 31-43.
    8. Watson, Keri B. & Ricketts, Taylor & Galford, Gillian & Polasky, Stephen & O'Niel-Dunne, Jarlath, 2016. "Quantifying flood mitigation services: The economic value of Otter Creek wetlands and floodplains to Middlebury, VT," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 16-24.
    9. Guimarães, Mª. Helena & Madureira, Lívia & Nunes, Luís Catela & Santos, José Lima & Sousa, Carlos & Boski, Tomasz & Dentinho, Tomaz, 2014. "Using Choice Modeling to estimate the effects of environmental improvements on local development: When the purpose modifies the tool," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 79-90.
    10. Lázaro-Touza, Lara & Atkinson, Giles, 2013. "Nature, roads or hospitals? An empirical evaluation of ‘sustainable development preferences’," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 63-72.
    11. Gerardo Marletto, 2010. "Transalpine Transport Policies: Towards A Shared Approach," Articles, International Journal of Transport Economics, vol. 37(3).
    12. Hudson, Paul & Botzen, W.J. Wouter & Feyen, Luc & Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H., 2016. "Incentivising flood risk adaptation through risk based insurance premiums: Trade-offs between affordability and risk reduction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 1-13.
    13. Wright, Stuart A.L. & Fritsch, Oliver, 2011. "Operationalising active involvement in the EU Water Framework Directive: Why, when and how?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2268-2274.
    14. Scharin, Henrik & Ericsdotter, Siv & Elliott, Michael & Turner, R. Kerry & Niiranen, Susa & Blenckner, Thorsten & Hyytiäinen, Kari & Ahlvik, Lassi & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Hasselström, Lin, 2016. "Processes for the sustainable stewardship of marine environments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 55-67.
    15. Rogers, A. & Kragt, Marit Ellen & Gibson, F. & Pannell, David J. & Burton, Michael P. & Petersen, L., 2013. "Is non-market valuation used in environmental policy making?," Working Papers 156197, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    16. Hyytiainen, Kari & Ahtiainen, Heini & Heikkila, Jaakko & Helin, Janne & Huhtala, Anni & Iho, Antti & Koikkalainen, Kauko & Miettinen, Antti & Pouta, Eija & Vesterinen, Janne, 2009. "An integrated simulation model to evaluate national policies for the abatement of agricultural nutrients in the Baltic Sea," Discussion Papers 49896, MTT Agrifood Research Finland.

    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:kap:enreec:v:37:y:2007:i:1:p:253-269. 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 (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.