On non-marginal cost-benefit analysis
Conventional benefit-cost analysis incorporates the normally reasonable assumption that the policy or project under examination is marginal. In particular, it is assumed that the policy or project does not change the underlying growth rate of the economy. However, this assumption may be inappropriate in some important circumstances, notably responding to climate change. One example is the benefit-cost analysis of global targets for carbon emissions, while another might be a large renewable energy project in a small economy, such as a hydropower dam. This paper develops some theory on the evaluation of non-marginal policies and projects, with simple empirical applications to climate change. We examine the conditions under which evaluation of a non-marginal project using marginal methods may be wrong, and in our empirical examples we show that both qualitative and large quantitative errors are plausible.
|Date of creation:||Mar 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE|
Phone: +44 (020) 7405 7686
Web page: http://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham.
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lsg:lsgwps:wp18. 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: (The GRI Administration)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.