IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v9y1990i4p536-547.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comment: Judgments about who has standing in cost-benefit analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Dale Whittington

    (Associate Professor of City and Regional Planning and Environmental Sciences and Engineering at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

  • Duncan Macrae

    (William Rand Kenan, Jr., Professor of Political Science and Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Dale Whittington & Duncan Macrae, 1990. "Comment: Judgments about who has standing in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 536-547.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:9:y:1990:i:4:p:536-547
    DOI: 10.2307/3325263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/3325263
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/3325263?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Duncan Macrae & Dale Whittington, 1987. "Assessing preferences in cost-benefit analysis: Reflections on rural water supply evaluation in haiti," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(2), pages 246-263.
    2. Richard Thaler & William Gould, 1982. "Public policy toward life saving: Should consumer preferences rule?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(2), pages 223-242.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard O. Zerbe, 2013. "Ethical benefit–cost analysis as art and science: ten rules for benefit–cost analysis," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 8, pages 264-293, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Zerbe, Richard, 2023. "A foundation for benefit-cost analysis," MPRA Paper 121294, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2024.
    3. Campbell, Harry F. & Brown, Richard P.C., 2005. "A multiple account framework for cost-benefit analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 23-32.
    4. Richard O. Zerbe, 1998. "Is cost-benefit analysis legal? Three rules," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 419-456.
    5. Anthony E. Boardman & David H. Greenberg & Aidan R. Vining & David L. Weimer, 2022. "Standing in Cost‐Benefit Analysis: Where, Who, What (Counts)?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 1157-1176, September.
    6. Richard O. Zerbe, 1991. "Comment: Does benefit cost analysis stand alone? rights and standing," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 96-105.
    7. Dale Whittington & Richard T. Carson & Thomas Sterner, 2023. "Policy Note: Benefit Cost Analysis of Water Investments in the Anthropocene," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-23, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hosseini, Hamid, 2003. "The arrival of behavioral economics: from Michigan, or the Carnegie School in the 1950s and the early 1960s?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 391-409, September.
    2. Richard O. Zerbe, 1991. "Comment: Does benefit cost analysis stand alone? rights and standing," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 96-105.
    3. Ahmed, Hiba, 2000. "The Benefits Of Water Improvement Program To Women: A Literature Review," Staff Paper Series 11567, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    4. Timothy L. McDaniels, 1988. "Comparing Expressed and Revealed Preferences for Risk Reduction: Different Hazards and Question Frames," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 593-604, December.

    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:wly:jpamgt:v:9:y:1990:i:4:p:536-547. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.