IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v3y2009i1p72-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New foundations of cost–benefit analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Adler
  • Eric A. Posner

Abstract

This article responds to the criticisms of New Foundations of Cost–Benefit Analysis that appeared in a review by Amy Sinden, Douglas A. Kysar, and David M. Driesen. We argue that their criticisms are either based on misunderstandings of our approach or are too demanding, in the sense that no reasonable decision procedure would satisfy them. We illustrate this second argument by demonstrating that their preferred approach – feasibility analysis – has little to recommend it.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Adler & Eric A. Posner, 2009. "New foundations of cost–benefit analysis," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), pages 72-83, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:3:y:2009:i:1:p:72-83
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01045.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01045.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01045.x?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. Matthew Adler, "undated". "Against 'Individual Risk': A Sympathetic Critique of Risk Assessment," Scholarship at Penn Law upenn_wps-1013, University of Pennsylvania Law School.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kenneth T. Bogen, 2014. "Unveiling Variability and Uncertainty for Better Science and Decisions on Cancer Risks from Environmental Chemicals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(10), pages 1795-1806, October.
    2. Christoph M. Rheinberger & Nicolas Treich, 2017. "Attitudes Toward Catastrophe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 609-636, July.
    3. Marek Cech & Martin Januska, 2020. "Evaluation of Risk Management Maturity in the Czech Automotive Industry: Model and Methodology," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(55), pages 824-824, August.
    4. Timothy Malloy & Ann Blake & Igor Linkov & Peter Sinsheimer, 2015. "Decisions, Science, and Values: Crafting Regulatory Alternatives Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(12), pages 2137-2151, 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:reggov:v:3:y:2009:i:1:p:72-83. 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.