IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/wirecc/v8y2017i2ne446.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting for risk aversion, income distribution and social welfare in cost‐benefit analysis for flood risk management

Author

Listed:
  • Jarl Kind
  • W.J. Wouter Botzen
  • Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts

Abstract

Most cost‐benefit analysis (CBA) textbooks and guidelines recognize the objective of CBAs to improve social welfare—a function of well‐being of all individuals, conceptualized by utility. However, today's common practice to value flood risk management benefits as the reduction of the expected annual damages does not comply with this concept of social welfare, since it erroneously focuses on money instead of well‐being (utility). Diminishing marginal utility of money implies that risk aversion and income differences should be taken into account while calculating the social welfare benefits of flood risk management. This is especially important when social vulnerability is high, damage compensation is incomplete and the distribution of income is regarded as unfair and income is not redistributed in other ways. Disagreement, misconception, complexity, untrained professionals, political economy and failing guidance are potential reasons why these concepts are not being applied. Compared to the common practice, a theoretically more sound social welfare approach to CBA for flood risk management leads to different conclusions on who to target, what to do, how much to invest and how to share risks, with increased emphasis on resiliency measures for population segments with low income and high social vulnerability. The social welfare approach to CBA, illustrated in this study in the context of floods, can be applied to other climate risks as well, such as storms, droughts, and landslides. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8:e446. doi: 10.1002/wcc.446 This article is categorized under: Climate Economics > Iterative Risk‐Management Policy Portfolios

Suggested Citation

  • Jarl Kind & W.J. Wouter Botzen & Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts, 2017. "Accounting for risk aversion, income distribution and social welfare in cost‐benefit analysis for flood risk management," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:8:y:2017:i:2:n:e446
    DOI: 10.1002/wcc.446
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.446
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/wcc.446?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas H. Douthat & Fahmida Akhter & Rachelle Sanderson & Jerrod Penn, 2023. "Stakeholder Perceptions about Incorporating Externalities and Vulnerability into Benefit–Cost Analysis Tools for Watershed Flood Risk Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Bramka Arga Jafino & Jan H. Kwakkel & Frans Klijn, 2022. "Evaluating the distributional fairness of alternative adaptation policies: a case study in Vietnam’s upper Mekong Delta," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Alexander Bisaro & Mark Bel & Jochen Hinkel & Sien Kok & Laurens M. Bouwer, 2020. "Leveraging public adaptation finance through urban land reclamation: cases from Germany, the Netherlands and the Maldives," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 671-689, June.
    4. Alessio Ciullo & Jan H. Kwakkel & Karin M. De Bruijn & Neelke Doorn & Frans Klijn, 2020. "Efficient or Fair? Operationalizing Ethical Principles in Flood Risk Management: A Case Study on the Dutch‐German Rhine," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(9), pages 1844-1862, September.
    5. Sunday Stephen AJEMUNIGBOHUN & Sulaiman Ademola Oreshile, 2019. "Risk Aversion And Motor Insurance Demand: Empirical Evidence From Nigeria," Annals of University of Craiova - Economic Sciences Series, University of Craiova, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 2(47), pages 211-222, December.
    6. Chabba, Meenakshi & Bhat, Mahadev G. & Sarmiento, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Risk-based benefit-cost analysis of ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction with considerations of co-benefits, equity, and sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    7. Tovar Reaños, Miguel A., 2021. "Floods, flood policies and changes in welfare and inequality: Evidence from Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).

    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:wirecc:v:8:y:2017:i:2:n:e446. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1757-7799 .

    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.