Abstract

 
 

References (3)



 
 

Citations (6)



 


 



Benefit-Cost Analysis of Environmental Projects: A Plethora of Systematic Biases


Philip E. Graves


University of Colorado at Boulder - Department of Economics

August 9, 2010

CESifo Working Paper Series No. 3144

Abstract:     
There are many reasons to suspect that benefit-cost analysis applied to environmental policies will result in policy decisions that will reject those environmental policies. The important question, of course, is whether those rejections are based on proper science. The present paper explores sources of bias in the methods used to evaluate environmental policy in the United States, although most of the arguments translate immediately to decision-making in other countries. There are some “big picture” considerations that have gone unrecognized, and there are numerous more minor, yet cumulatively important, technical details that point to potentially large biases against acceptance on benefit-cost grounds of environmental policies that have true marginal benefits greater than true marginal costs, both in net present value terms. It is hoped that the issues raised here will improve future conduct of benefit-cost analyses of environmental policies.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 34

Keywords: benefit-cost analysis, environmental policy, decision making, choice behavior, public goods, willingness-to-pay, willingness-to-accept, precautionary principle, hedonic methods, sum of specific damages, health effects model, environmental perceptions

JEL Classification: C91, D12, D61, D62, D78, D81, H11, H41, H43, Q20, Q30, Q51, Q58

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: August 10, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Graves, Philip E., Benefit-Cost Analysis of Environmental Projects: A Plethora of Systematic Biases (August 9, 2010). CESifo Working Paper Series No. 3144. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1655629

Contact Information

Philip E. Graves (Contact Author)
University of Colorado at Boulder - Department of Economics ( email )
Campus Box 256
Boulder, CO 80309-0256
United States
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 712
Downloads: 350
Download Rank: 32,368
References:  3
Citations:  6

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.969 seconds