Environmental Economics

The New Challenge to Cost-Benefit Analysis: How Sound Is the Opponents' Empirical Case

Journal article reviewing the economic analysis of three environmental decisions made during the 1960s and 1970s prepared by critics of using cost-benefit analysis to analyze environmental decisions. The three decisions concerned damming the Grand Canyon, regulating vinyl chloride in the workplace, and regulating lead in gasoline. The article concludes that the analysis does not support the authors' conclusion that cost-benefit analysis would have reached the environmentally "wrong" conclusion in all three cases and that, on the contrary, cost-benefit analysis provides a useful tool for summarizing the economic efficiency of a proposed action at the time that decisions needs to be made. The article is available from Regulation at http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv28n3/v28n3-3.pdf

  • Keywords

    Subject:
    2. Cost-Benefit and Cost Effectiveness Analysis
    2. Cost-Benefit and Cost Effectiveness Analysis - Methodology
    Environmental Media:
    a. Air
    f. Multimedia
    a. Air - Mobile Source
    a. Air - Stratospheric
    Authors:
    Carlin, Alan
    EPA Project Officer/ Manager:
    Geographic Area:
    United States
    Study Purpose:
    Policy Evaluation
    Inventory Record #: PE-0017
  • Participating Organizations

    Non-EPA Publishing Organization:
    RegulationAddress: 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW
    City: Washington State: DC ZIP: 20001
    Phone: Fax:
    E-mail:
  • Report Details
    Type:
    Final
    Date:
    10/01/2005
    Number of Pages:
    6
    Comment:
  • How to Obtain Report

    Not available from EERM
    Other Ways to Obtain the Report:
    You can obtain this report by contacting Regulation directly at:
    1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20001