Illustration of a Method to Incorporate Preference Uncertainty in Benefit–Cost Analysis

Abstract

Benefit–cost analysis is widely used to evaluate alternative courses of action that are designed to achieve policy objectives. Although many analyses take uncertainty into account, they typically only consider uncertainty about cost estimates and physical states of the world, whereas uncertainty about individual preferences, thus the benefit of policy intervention, is ignored. Here, we propose a strategy to integrate individual uncertainty about preferences into benefit–cost analysis using societal preference intervals, which are ranges of values over which it is unclear whether society as a whole should accept or reject an option. To illustrate the method, we use preferences for implementing a smart grid technology to sustain critical electricity demand during a 24‐hour regional power blackout on a hot summer weekend. Preferences were elicited from a convenience sample of residents in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. This illustrative example shows that uncertainty in individual preferences, when aggregated to form societal preference intervals, can substantially change society's decision. We conclude with a discussion of where preference uncertainty comes from, how it might be reduced, and why incorporating unresolved preference uncertainty into benefit–cost analyses can be important.

Estimating what US residential customers are willing to pay for resilience to large electricity outages of long duration

“…In this study, we focused on several key variables to define the outage scenario (outages fixed at 10-day duration, back-up coverage at 20 A and weather conditions below freezing). These estimates could be used in regional investment decision-making problems under these specified conditions (Baik et al 3,34 are examples), but should not be generalized to investment decisionmaking that involves significantly different conditions. However, using the methods developed in this study, it is possible to construct context-specific customer-damage functions by conducting a series of studies across different scenarios.…”

Information effects on lay tradeoffs between national regulatory costs and benefits

“…The need to develop personalized uncertainty ranges for gauging the acceptability of a hypothetical regulation evolved into an alternative stated-preferences method (Finkel & Johnson, 2018), involving a multiple-bounded discrete choice preference elicitation method (cf. Baik et al, 2019). Table 1, derived from our earlier studies (Finkel & 1 Only about 35% of 95 micro-risk stated preferences studies conducted between 1973 and 2009 reported using trims; if and how many studies trimmed but did not report those trims is unknown (Braathen et al, 2011) Johnson & Finkel, 2016) and our subsequent macro-risk research experience, compares several attributes of the conventional and the novel macro-risk stated preference approaches.…”

“…The need to develop personalized uncertainty ranges for gauging the acceptability of a hypothetical regulation evolved into an alternative stated‐preferences method (Finkel & Johnson, 2018), involving a multiple‐bounded discrete choice preference elicitation method (cf. Baik et al., 2019).…”

Evaluation of Transit Signal Priority for Bus Rapid Transit in Heterogeneous Traffic Flow

“…CBA is widely used to evaluate alternative courses of action that are designed to achieve appropriate policy objectives [26]. When travel time reduces, passengers experience lower travel time; all should be accounted for benefit analysis.…”