Discount Rates for Public Investment Under Uncertainty

  • Agnar Sandmo
Part of the International Economic Association Series book series (IEA)


The problem of efficient allocation of capital in a world of uncertainty has played a major role in the debate on the social rate of discount. One view, which has been advanced by Hirshleifer [7, 8] and supported by Diamond [6], is that differences in rates of return on capital in the private sector of the economy reflect differences in riskiness among alternative lines of investment, and that these differences are of normative significance for the allocation of capital in the public sector. Thus, when discounting costs and benefits of a particular type of public investment, the government should take as its discount rate the rate of return on capital in a private industry of similar riskiness. Another view, which counts Samuelson [17] and Vickrey [22] among its supporters, is that because of the extremely large and diversified investment portfolio held by the public sector, the marginal return from public investment as a whole is practically risk free and should be equated to the market rate on riskless bonds. In an important recent contribution Arrow and Lind [2] come to the same conclusion for a somewhat different reason; the total risk carried by the public sector is shared among so many that each individual’s risk burden becomes negligible.


Public Sector Stock Market Discount Rate American Economic Review Marginal Productivity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    K. J. Arrow, ‘Le rôle des valeurs boursières pour la répartition la meilleure des risques’, in Econométrie (Paris, CNRS: 1953). Reprinted as ‘The Role of Securities in the Optimal Allocation of Risk-Bearing’, Review of Economic Studies vol. XXXI (April 1964), pp. 91–6.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    K. J. Arrow, and R. C. Lind, ‘Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions’, American Economic Review vol. LX (June 1970), pp. 364–78.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    W. J. Baumol, ‘On the Social Rate of Discount’, American Economic Review vol. LVIII (September 1968), pp. 788–802.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    D. F. Bradford, ‘Constraints on Public Action and Rules for Social Decisions’, American Economic Review vol. LX (September 1970), pp. 642–654.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    G. Debreu, Theory of Value (New York: Wiley, 1959).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    P. A. Diamond, ‘The Role of a Stock Market in a General Equilibrium Model with Technological Uncertainty’, American Economic Review vol. LVII (September 1967), pp. 759–76.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Hirshleifer, ‘Efficient Allocation of Capital in an Uncertain World’, American Economic Review vol. LIV (May 1964), pp. 77–85.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. Hirshleifer, ‘Investment Decision under Uncertainty: Applications of the State-Preference Approach’, Quarterly Journal of Economics vol. LXXX (May 1966), pp. 252–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. Hirshleifer and D. L. Shapiro, ‘The Treatment of Risk and Uncertainty’, in R. H. Haveman and J. Margolis (eds.), Public Expenditure and Policy Analysis (Chicago: Markham, 1970).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    J. Lintner, ‘The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets’, Review of Economics and Statistics vol. XLVII (February 1965), pp. 13–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    S. A. Marglin, Public Investment Criteria (London: Allen and Unwin, 1967).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    F. Modigliani and M. H. Miller, ‘The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment’, American Economic Review vol. XLVIII (June 1958), pp. 261–97.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. Mossin, ‘Equilibrium in a Capital Asset Market’, Econometrica vol. XXXIV (October 1966), pp. 768–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Mossin, ‘Security Pricing and Investment Criteria in Competitive Markets’, American Economic Review vol. LIX (December 1969), pp. 749–56.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    M. V. Pauly, ‘Risk and the Social Rate of Discount,’ American Economic Review vol. LX (March 1970), pp. 195–98.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    P. A. Samuelson, ‘The Pure Theory of Public Expenditures’, Review of Economics and Statistics vol. XXXVI (November 1954), pp. 387–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    P. A. Samuelson, ‘Discussion’, American Economic Review vol. LIV (May 1964), pp. 93–6.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    A. Sandmo, ‘Equilibrium and Efficiency in Loan Markets’, Economica vol. XXXVII (February 1970), pp. 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    A. Sandmo, ‘On the Theory of the Competitive Firm under Price Uncertainty’, American Economic Review vol. LXI (March 1971), pp. 65–73.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    A. Sandmo, and J. H. Drèze, ‘Discount Rates for Public Investment in Closed and Open Economies’, Economica vol. XXXVIII (November 1971), pp. 395–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    W. F. Sharpe, ‘Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk’, Journal of Finance vol. XIX (September 1964), pp. 425–42.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    W. Vickrey, ‘Discussion’, American Economic Review vol. LIV (May 1964), pp. 88–92.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    R. Wilson, ‘The Theory of Syndicates’, Econometrica vol. XXXVI (January 1968), pp. 119–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Economic Association 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • Agnar Sandmo
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian School of EconomicsBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations