The Comprehensiveness Dilemma of Cost-Benefit Analysis

Authors

  • Tore Sager Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18757/ejtir.2013.13.3.2997

Abstract

Most project impacts on environment, climate, and health are not valued in markets or in choice situations similar to market transactions. Analysts have to go beyond revealed preferences to stated preference interviews and even to deliberative processes in order to elicit preferences from which the trade-off values (‘prices’) of the expanded cost-benefit analysis (CBA) can be deduced. The comprehensiveness dilemma of social CBA arises with the choice between calculation of ‘prices’ from revealed preferences and communicative construction of ‘prices’ on the basis of preferences stated in deliberation. New methods for eliciting preferences, such as deliberative monetary valuation, yield preferences influenced by ethical and political values. The interpretation of the analytic results then becomes problematic. The comprehensiveness dilemma is that planners must choose between a narrow CBA making good economic sense, and a comprehensive CBA with dubious economic content. By aiming for completeness, CBA changes character from being a summation of changes in individual wellbeing to being a mix of this and the summation of monetary expressions of ethical and political viewpoints and attitudes.

Downloads

Metrics

PDF views
140
Jul 2013Jan 2014Jul 2014Jan 2015Jul 2015Jan 2016Jul 2016Jan 2017Jul 2017Jan 2018Jul 2018Jan 2019Jul 2019Jan 2020Jul 2020Jan 2021Jul 2021Jan 2022Jul 2022Jan 2023Jul 2023Jan 2024Jul 2024Jan 2025Jul 2025Jan 202610
|

Downloads

Published

2013-06-01

How to Cite

Sager, T. (2013). The Comprehensiveness Dilemma of Cost-Benefit Analysis. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.18757/ejtir.2013.13.3.2997

Issue

Section

Research articles