IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/renvpo/doi10.1086-715623.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality Science for Quality Decisions: Protecting the Scientific Integrity of Benefit–Cost Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Al McGartland

Abstract

Benefit–cost analysis (BCA) provides important science to inform regulatory decision-making. Ideally, the BCA should be based on science, including economics. However, the prominent role of BCA in the policy-making process also creates an incentive to adopt practices that produce results that support a preferred policy. Indeed, rather than informing decision-making, BCA can become a tool for justifying a decision that is made by manipulating results in ways contrary to good science. This article identifies two challenges that threaten the scientific integrity of a BCA because they allow normative and policy judgments to enter into the BCA. The article concludes by identifying actions to help protect the scientific integrity of BCA.

Suggested Citation

  • Al McGartland, 2021. "Quality Science for Quality Decisions: Protecting the Scientific Integrity of Benefit–Cost Analysis," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 340-351.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:renvpo:doi:10.1086/715623
    DOI: 10.1086/715623
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/715623
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/715623
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/715623?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:renvpo:doi:10.1086/715623. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/REEP .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.