Abstract
Because of its all-embracing viewpoint and monetary perspective, cost–benefit analysis has been heavily criticised by many social scientists. It is seen as usurping political power, yet being susceptible to political manipulation. Its decision rule does not seem to match how individuals actually take decisions, in numerous well-defined ways. However, this critique can be turned against alternative means of decision making. In particular, if individuals do not act in such a way as to maximise their well-being, cost–benefit analysis should assess how people are actually affected by their own decisions. In terms of intensity of preference, cost–benefit analysis offers a more rational means of representation than do multi-vote referenda.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque, critique des postulats et axiomes de l’École Americaine. Econometrica, 21, 503–546.
Foster, C. D., & Beesley, M. E. (1963). Estimating the social benefit of constructing an underground railway in London. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 126, 46–92.
Gowdy, J. M. (2007). Toward an experimental foundation for benefit-cost analysis. Ecological Economics, 63, 649–655.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.
Price, C. (2000). Valuation of unpriced products: Contingent valuation, cost–benefit analysis and participatory democracy. Land Use Policy, 17, 187–196.
Price, C. (2007). Sustainable forest management, pecuniary externalities and invisible stakeholders. Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 751–762.
Prior, M. (1998). Economic valuation and environmental values. Environmental Values, 7, 423–441.
Sagoff, M. (1988). The economy of the Earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Savage, L. J. (1951). The theory of statistical decisions. American Statistical Association Journal, 46, 55–67.
Shackle, G. L. S. (1958). Time in economics. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Thaler, R. (1980). Towards a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 39–60.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Price, C. (2017). Critiques of Cost–benefit Analysis—and of Alternative Processes. In: Landscape Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54873-9_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54873-9_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54872-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54873-9
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)