IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpb/discus/364.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Distributionally Weighted Cost-Benefit Analysis: From Theory to Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas van der Pol
  • Frits Bos

    (CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis)

  • Gerbert Romijn

Abstract

In CBA practices around the world, benefits are valued regardless of to whom they accrue. This disregards basic economic principles, like declining marginal utility of income, or inequality aversion. This paper argues that if redistribution matters, net benefits must be aggregated using a distributionally weighted CBA. We introduce the building blocks to do so, i.e. a marginal welfare weight selection, a weight normalization and benefit accounting choices, and an analysis of redistribution effects. A case study about child care benefits in the Netherlands is presented as an illustration. We conclude that guidelines on welfare weights, normalization and practical issues are needed to facilitate experiments with case study applications of marginal welfare weights. We also argue that although distributionally weighted CBA more closely adheres to theoretical foundations, it may be demanding, prone to misuse and might distract attention from the decision problem at hand. Ultimately, welfare weighting could undermine political support for CBA. We end with a summary of other ways to highlight income redistribution in CBAs, like an overview of purchasing power effects. If these are insufficient for informed decision-making, distributionally weighted CBA could be considered as a complementary tool for policies that involve major equity effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas van der Pol & Frits Bos & Gerbert Romijn, 2017. "Distributionally Weighted Cost-Benefit Analysis: From Theory to Practice," CPB Discussion Paper 364, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/omnidownload/CPB-Discussion-Paper-364-Distributionally-weighted-cost-benefit-analysis.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harberger, Arnold C, 1978. "On the Use of Distributional Weights in Social Cost-Benefit Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(2), pages 87-120, April.
    2. Bev Dahlby, 2008. "The Marginal Cost of Public Funds: Theory and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262042509, December.
    3. Lockwood, Benjamin B. & Weinzierl, Matthew, 2016. "Positive and normative judgments implicit in U.S. tax policy, and the costs of unequal growth and recessions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 30-47.
    4. Jacobs, Bas & Jongen, Egbert L.W. & Zoutman, Floris T., 2017. "Revealed social preferences of Dutch political parties," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 81-100.
    5. Floris T. Zoutman & Bas Jacobs & Egbert L. W. Jongen, 2016. "Redistributive Politics and the Tyranny of the Middle Class," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-032/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. David J. Evans, 2005. "The elasticity of marginal utility of consumption: estimates for 20 OECD countries," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 26(2), pages 197-224, 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. Frits Bos & Thomas van der Pol & Gerbert Romijn, 2018. "Should CBA’s include a correction for the marginal excess burden of taxation?," CPB Discussion Paper 370, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Denis Fougere & Arthur Heim, 2019. "L'évaluation socioéconomique de l'investissement social: Comment mettre en oeuvre des analyses coûts-bénéfices pour les politiques d'emploi, de santé et d'éducation," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/5lge9h8e809, Sciences Po.
    3. Denis Fougère & Arthur Heim, 2019. "L'évaluation socioéconomique de l'investissement social," Working Papers hal-03456048, HAL.
    4. Frits Bos & Thomas van der Pol & Gerbert Romijn, 2018. "Should CBA’s include a correction for the marginal excess burden of taxation?," CPB Discussion Paper 370.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5lge9h8e809258uvvpjn34ekm4 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas van der Pol & Frits Bos & Gerbert Romijn, 2017. "Distributionally Weighted Cost-Benefit Analysis: From Theory to Practice," CPB Discussion Paper 364.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Frits Bos & Thomas van der Pol & Gerbert Romijn, 2018. "Should CBA’s include a correction for the marginal excess burden of taxation?," CPB Discussion Paper 370.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    3. Boadway,Robin & Cuff,Katherine, 2022. "Tax Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108949453.
    4. Frits Bos & Thomas van der Pol & Gerbert Romijn, 2018. "Should CBA’s include a correction for the marginal excess burden of taxation?," CPB Discussion Paper 370, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    5. Mark Colas & Sebastian Findeisen & Dominik Sachs, 2021. "Optimal Need-Based Financial Aid," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(2), pages 492-533.
    6. Felix J. Bierbrauer & Pierre C. Boyer & Emanuel Hansen, 2023. "Pareto‐Improving Tax Reforms and the Earned Income Tax Credit," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(3), pages 1077-1103, May.
    7. Robin Jessen & Maria Metzing & Davud Rostam-Afschar, 2017. "Optimal Taxation under Different Concepts of Justness," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 953, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    8. Bas Jacobs, 2018. "The marginal cost of public funds is one at the optimal tax system," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(4), pages 883-912, August.
    9. Vidar Christiansen & Zhiyang Jia & Thor O. Thoresen, 2022. "Assessing income tax perturbations," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 29(2), pages 472-504, April.
    10. Spencer Bastani & Jacob Lundberg, 2017. "Political preferences for redistribution in Sweden," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 15(4), pages 345-367, December.
    11. Felix J. Bierbrauer & Pierre C. Boyer & Andreas Peichl, 2021. "Politically Feasible Reforms of Nonlinear Tax Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 153-191, January.
    12. Ferey, Antoine & Haufler, Andreas & Perroni, Carlo, 2023. "Incentives, globalization, and redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    13. Robin Boadway, 2017. "Second-Best Theory: Ageing well at Sixty," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 249-270, May.
    14. Ayaz, Mehmet & Fricke, Lea & Fuest, Clemens & Sachs, Dominik, 2023. "Who should bear the burden of COVID-19 related fiscal pressure? An optimal income taxation perspective," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    15. Asplund, Disa & Pyddoke, Roger, 2018. "Can increases in public transport supply be justified by concern for low-income individuals?," Working papers in Transport Economics 2018:7, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI), revised 30 Mar 2020.
    16. Fabian Feger & Doina Radulescu & Doina Maria Radulescu, 2018. "Redistribution through Income Taxation and Public Utility Pricing in the Presence of Energy Efficiency Considerations," CESifo Working Paper Series 7195, CESifo.
    17. Raúl Castro & Jorge Armando Rueda Gallardo, 2020. "Estimación Empírica de la Tasa Social de Descuento Estudio de Caso Bolivia," Documentos CEDE 18020, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    18. Johannes Hermle & Andreas Peichl, 2018. "Jointly Optimal Taxes for Different Types of Income," CESifo Working Paper Series 7248, CESifo.
    19. Ashantha Ranasinghe & Xuejuan Su, 2023. "When social assistance meets market power: A mixed duopoly view of health insurance in the United States," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(4), pages 851-869, October.
    20. Brett, Craig & Weymark, John A., 2016. "Voting over selfishly optimal nonlinear income tax schedules with a minimum-utility constraint," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 18-31.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General

    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:cpb:discus:364. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cpbgvnl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.