IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this book

Evaluating public policies : Normative models beyond cost benefit analysis

Listed editor(s):
  • Tsoukiàs, Alexis
  • D'Alpaos, Chiara
Registered editor(s):
Listed author(s):
  • Lucertini, Giulia
Registered author(s):

    The subject of the thesis: “Evaluating Public Policies - Normative Models Beyond Cost Benefit Analysis” arise from the interest in the public policies and their construction, and in particular from the problem of how to evaluate them. The thesis, after a preliminary study of tools and mechanisms for European Public Policy founds distributions, has dealt with the Evidence-Based Policy-Making (EBPM). Thus, studying EBPM’s objectives and concepts, we studied the characteristics that make legitimate policies, but also those features that make public policies “unique” investment decisions, or better that make such decisions different from all other types of decisions. These feature were then analyzed and summarized in four points: ² medium or long-term time horizon; ² several different source of uncertainty related with the policy-maker; ² great importance of the economic aspect; ² great importance of the flexibility. The study of these has pushed the research and our thesis towards the study of the tools and the mechanisms necessary for the public policies creation, management and monitoring. Therefore, from this broad framework the thesis is focused on the study of the normative tools currently available to the policy-maker, that are: ² Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA); ² Decision Theory (DT); ² Real Options Theory (ROT). In the first part of the thesis we presented these three tools in relation to public policies and policy-makers decision. From that it became clear the inadequacy of the existent tools in addressing the different aspects that characterize public policies. The CBA, despite being the tool in absolute more used and recognized as legitimate, fails to take account and manage one of the four fundamental policies features, namely the policy-maker flexibility to manage the policy in all its time horizon. On the other hand, the study of DT has high- lighted the inadequacy of the decision tree analysis to consider and manage public policies in real time horizons. Finally, the ROT study has made clear that despite such tool represents an important evolution from the CBA, since it is closely related to finance, it fails to take into account the policy-makers subjectivity. In the second part of the thesis, starting from the conclusions about the relevance of the use of CBA, DT and ROT in the field of public policies, we propose a "new instrument". Such tool could be considered an evolution of the decision tree, because although it is built like a normal decision tree it take into account the time in practical terms: not only through a policy construction and decision-making over the time, but also through the inclusion of a subjective discount rate. The subjective discount rate, derived by the utility function of the policy-makers, is able to take account their personal time and uncertainty preferences. The thesis ends with a critical comparison between the new temporal decision tree proposed and the real options theory. The critical comparison show that the two tools are different in two main aspects: 1. The real options are based on the existence of an underlying asset, which allows many simplification. Assuming that the underlying asset perfectly replicate the investment and the investment decision, it is legitimate to use the risk-free discount rate and the risk neutral probabilities, then it is always on the existence of the underlying asset that it is based the probability conditioning. 2. Temporal decision trees on the contrary do not make any of these hypothesis. There is nothing that can replicate the investment, the decision and the policy-maker. The conditional probabilities depend only on the oracle choose, and all formal construction revolve around the subjectivity and preferences of policy-makers. In conclusion we can say that, starting from the study of public policies and their characteristics, the assessment tools currently available to the policy-makers (CBA, DT, and ROT) are incomplete. In other words, they are not able to adequately considered and man- aged the four key characteristics. Overcoming this problem is essential to give at the policy- makers a comprehensive assess and decision aiding tool, thus we decide to build a decision tree ad hoc for the public policies. Such decision tree was constructed following the traditional model, but it is adding both the temporal dimension and the economic concept of costs and benefits. Moreover, we have also revised and integrated some ideas related to managerial flexibility arising from the ROT. In this way, the resulting “temporal decision tree” is able to consider and manage the specific needs of the public decision-making, remaining both in the normative rationality field through the economic evaluation concepts, and in the constructive rationality field, because the tool incorporates and revolves around the subjective preference of the policy-makers and those who legitimately represent.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    in new window

    This book is provided by Paris Dauphine University in its series Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine with number 123456789/9265 and published in 2012.
    Handle: RePEc:dau:thesis:123456789/9265
    Note: dissertation
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dau:thesis:123456789/9265. 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: (Alexandre Faure)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.