New foundations of cost–benefit analysis

Adler, Matthew D.; Posner, Eric A.

doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01045.x

Cited by 104 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

132

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…BCA is a decision-procedure, which is justified if and only if its use by regulators advances the public good, however defined (Adler & Posner 2006) Early research pointed out that BCA does not systematically advance Pareto efficiency or Kaldor-Hicks efficiency, but this work was largely beside the point. The relevant question is (1) whether some other decisionprocedure would work better at advancing (2) the relevant public good.…”

Section: The Case For Bcamentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefit-Cost Paradigms in Financial Regulation

Posner¹,

Weyl²

2014

The Journal of Legal Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper builds on contributions to a Conference on Benefit-Cost Analysis of Financial Regulation, held at the University of Chicago, to show how benefit-cost analysis (BCA) of financial regulations should be conducted. Our major themes are that (1) on theoretical grounds, BCA should be easier for financial regulation than for other areas of regulation where it is already used, such as health and safety regulation; (2) while many needed valuations for BCA of financial regulation do not yet exist, those valuations are theoretically measurable; (3) once regulators commit to using BCA, economists will have incentives to work on supplying those valuations; (4) BCA will improve financial regulation and make it less vulnerable to judicial challenge; and (5) the specific protocols or paradigms of BCA will differ across different areas of financial regulation.

show abstract

Section: The Case For Bcamentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefit-Cost Paradigms in Financial Regulation

Posner¹,

Weyl²

2014

The Journal of Legal Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The foundations of the model were developed in 1853 by Jules Dupuit, with developments made over time (Adler and Posner, 2009). CBA defines the way in which costs and benefits should be measured and emphasises the principle that a decision must only be accepted if the benefits exceed the costs.…”

Section: Cost-benefit Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is a model that compares the losses and gains that are associated with a business decision, policy or an investment project so that effective decisions can be made (Adler and Posner, 2009). The gains in this model are regarded as the increments of human well-being, whereas the losses refer to the decrements caused to the wellbeing of humans as a result of a business decision, policy or an investment project.…”

Section: Cost-benefit Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a triple bottom line stakeholder satisfaction model

Amarah

Langston

2017

JCRE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development is a goal of modern society, and to a large extent it is governed by the actions of business organisations in trying to improve value to their stakeholders. Enlightened businesses know that 'stakeholder' does not equal 'shareholder', and there is more to value than financial returns and profits. Social and environmental value is also important. Using a triple bottom line philosophy, it is possible to strike an effective balance between economic, social and environmental objectives to release outcomes that are sustainable in the wider sense. To date, the quantification of these outcomes as a single decision metric has been problematic, given there is no common unit to integrate performance.This thesis combines a review of underpinning literature on the relationship between sustainable development and stakeholder satisfaction with an explanation of quantification models and a detailed case study of a stakeholder-driver approach to the procurement of sustainable built infrastructure for Energex in Brisbane.Using grounded theory, a conceptual framework is developed from these sources to not only integrate the various stakeholder perspectives of sustainability success, but to also measure this success in an objective way. The framework is a six-point star rating scheme to assess stakeholder satisfaction in terms of economic, social and environmental criteria to measure organisational decision-making performance. This framework is validated by an expert panel using focus group discussion and together with subsequent analysis a number of improvements are recommended.The refined framework reflects a stakeholder satisfaction model (SSM) that has commercialisation potential. It is found that the SSM can be used to assess the sustainable procurement of built infrastructure, such as a high performance green building, with four of the six stakeholder groups considered as generic and iv applicable to any sustainability initiative. The remaining two groups (namely "staff" and "environment") will need a modified assessment strategy for non-built environment initiatives.This research makes a contribution to knowledge through presentation of a model, grounded in practice, that can assess the economic, social and environmental performance of organisational decision-making from a stakeholder satisfaction perspective. It is acknowledged that there are a number of metrics that can be used to assess the star rating of each stakeholder group, although the ones chosen in this research are drawn from existing tools developed and validated by others. The final stage, which is beyond the scope of this thesis, is to commercialise the SSM in the construction and property industry in Australia.[401 words] v

show abstract

“…In the United States, the answer seems to be CBA. Since 1981, Republican and Democratic Presidents alike, the officials most responsive to the views of the median national citizen, have instructed agencies to employ CBA in evaluating policies (Adler and Posner, 2006). In the United Kingdom, the answer seems to be CEA.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…I have argued elsewhere that CBA and CEA, under appropriate conditions, can each be seen as rough proxies for a utilitarian SWF -for the maximisation of overall well-being (Adler, 2006;Adler and Posner, 2006). 5 In this world, the current world, contingent valuation studies have a very important role to play, as one source for estimating WTP amounts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingent valuation studies and health policy

Adler

2010

HEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New foundations of cost–benefit analysis

Cited by 104 publications

References 4 publications

Benefit-Cost Paradigms in Financial Regulation

Benefit-Cost Paradigms in Financial Regulation

Development of a triple bottom line stakeholder satisfaction model

Contingent valuation studies and health policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About