Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Online

99,00 € / $149.00*

* Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.
Publication Date:
May 2012
ISSN:
2152-2812
DOI:
10.1515/2152-2812.1112

See all formats and pricing

Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 99.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 149.00 *
Print
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 312.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 420.00 *
Print + Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 375.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 504.00 *
*Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.

The Normative Implications of Political Decision-Making for Benefit-Cost Analysis

Kerry Krutilla / Alexander Alexeev

1Indiana University, Bloomington

1Indiana University, Bloomington

Citation Information: Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis. Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages –, ISSN (Online) 2152-2812, DOI: 10.1515/2152-2812.1112, May 2012

Publication History:
Published Online:
2012-05-08

The Potential Pareto criterion, or Kaldor-Hicks standard, presumes that costs are not fully compensated. Yet, uncompensated costs can incentivize costly political activity and create uncertainty about political outcomes. These consequences are not reckoned in the standard benefit-cost analysis. This study models political costs and uncertainty as a function of project parameters and political-institutional characteristics. The economic consequences of political behavior are then incorporated into an adjusted project evaluation standard. This standard assures that the project’s conventionally measured net benefits are sufficient to cover political costs and uncertainty about the decision-making outcome.

Keywords: benefit cost analysis; political costs; transaction costs; political economy

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.