Is cost-benefit analysis legal? Three rules
When benefit-cost analysis produces a result that is objectionable does this mean that the technique is objectionable? It means only that the technique cannot rise above the individual and community values on which it rests. That is, values in benefit-cost analysis rest in large measure on law. An understanding of what values count and whose values count and why they count cannot then be separated from law. This understanding of value obviates most criticisms of benefit-cost analysis as a technique. Benefit-cost analysis also contributes to the law so that, for example, when there is a discrepancy between legal and psychological ownership, efficiency suggests that the law change to reflect psychological ownership. The values considered in benefit-cost analysis are very broad and include those associated with income distribution-the most radical proposition in this article-as well as the value of harm even when it is specifically unknown. An appreciation of the broad range of what is meant by value further dislodges criticisms of benefit-cost analysis.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 17 (1998)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home|
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.:
- Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-54, Summer.
- Jonathan A. Lesser & Richard O. Zerbe, 1995. "What Can Economic Analysis Contribute To The 'Sustainability' Debate?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(3), pages 88-100, 07.
- 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.
- Shira B. Lewin, 1996. "Economics and Psychology: Lessons for Our Own Day from the Early Twentieth Century," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1293-1323, September.
- 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.
- Burton A. Weisbrod, 1981. "Benefit-Cost Analysis of a Controlled Experiment: Treating the Mentally Ill," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 16(4), pages 523-548.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:17:y:1998:i:3:p:419-456. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.