More handpicked essays just for you.
Define cost benefit analysis 500 words
Advantages of cost benefit analysis
Advantages of cost benefit analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction:
With regards to environmental policy, it is important for governments to consider concepts such as risk, economic efficiency and cost-benefit. A common concern voiced by proponents of regulatory reform in recent decades has been that the costs associated with certain regulations outweigh the benefits that the regulations are intended to provide (Tengs &Graham, 1996). Another, and somewhat related, view is that, more intelligent regulatory policies could achieve the same social goals (e.g., cleaner environment, safer workplaces) at less cost, or could achieve more ambitious goals at the same cost (Tengs &Graham, 1996). For the reasons above, Federal Agencies, have invested in using tools such as the cost benefit analysis and risk assessment to minimize eventual risks of excessive costs and negative environmental impact. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate and determine whether tools such as the risk assessment and cost benefit analysis are invaluable tools and important ingredients in environmental policymaking.
Cost Benefit Analysis:
According to renowned environmental economist Dan Phaneuf (2005) “the cost-benefit analysis provides an organizational framework for identifying, quantifying, and comparing the costs and benefits (measured in dollars) of a proposed policy action”. Certainly, “the final decision is informed (though not necessarily determined) by a comparison of the total costs and benefits (Phaneuf, 2005)”. A CRS report for congress recalls that Federal agencies have used cost-benefit analysis extensively since the 1930s (Moore, 1995).Indeed, the government initially used the technique to “evaluate the economic feasibility of water resource projects, applying it later to other public infrastructure ...
... middle of paper ...
...ory agencies to use risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis in order to provide both the public and the regulated community with critical information about the cost and effectiveness of environmental regulation” (Environmental Policy making and Policy Analysis lecture).
References:
Coppock, R., 1984. Social Constraints on Technological Progress. Gower, Hampshire.
Environmental Policy Making and policy Analysis lecture notes (2013).
Fischer F (1991). Risk assessment and environmental crisis: toward an integration of science and participation. Organization & Environment. 5, 113-132.
Moore, J (1995). Cost-Benefit Analysis: Issues in Its Use in Regulation. CSR Report for Congress, . retrieved December 4 2013, from https://blackboard.jhu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-1355949-dt-content-rid 6263192_2/courses/AS.420.614.81.FA13/Unit_5_docs/cost_benefit_issues_in_regs.pdf
Throughout the risk assessment process, ideas for action were identified and documented. The documentation of these ideas led to the development of potential action item worksheets which were then selected, prioritized, and refined. Detailed risk assessment information for each hazard is included and located through this document.
This policy analysis will discuss the following topics: the problem, Policy development, Policy Effectiveness, Conclusion Alternatives, Cost & Benefits, and Recommendations.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates air pollution through various policies passed through the Supreme Court. The scope of this paper is to investigate the Clean Air Act of 1970, and to analyze the impact it has on businesses and society. It provides a rationale for the policy, and contains a brief overview of governmental involvement in regulating air pollution. Further investigation identifies key stakeholders in business, government, and society, and assesses the pros and cons of regulating air pollution. Finally, the paper concludes with limitations of this analysis and recommendations for future action.
...tained a streak of sustaining a strong society when suggesting their laws into the Criminal Justice System. Nonetheless, the recent proposal discussed on whether environmental harm should be criminalized has sparked controversy. There are many pros and cons that can be acknowledged in this case. One main thing is certain; the environment is very sacred to every human being and should be well cared for. Thus, there are many other techniques that can do this rather than it simply being placed in the Criminal Code. Civilians need to have a fair chance to deal with problems and as a whole; they can come together to help this environmental issue. Non-legal regulators can work together with society to better our world. Taking legal action would make things more complicated than need be when considering a law that has more negatives to our justice system than positives.
Soledad, A. (2012). UNEP: World Congress on Justice, Governance and Law for Environmental Sustainability. Environmental Policy and Law, 42(4/5), 204-205. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1239086063/fulltextPDF/938578CF70664516PQ/3?accountid=28180
Before the 1970s, environmental policy was not the more publicized issue that it is today. After the Santa Barbara oil spill in 1969, the environmental movement really took off. The federal government took the situation into their hands and paid more attention to environmental policy than they had been doing in the past. While the states still have quite a bit of power when it com...
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a seemingly straightforward analytical tool that is used to assess complex public policy decisions, however CEA does not always account for all intangible benefits. Cost-effectiveness is used to help pinpoint neglected opportunities for improving health and then allotting scarce resources to obtain better health outcomes for society. Since Britain’s has limited resources to concentrate on public health issues that have varying outcomes with regards to survival and quality of life. Cost-Utility Analysis (CUA), part of the cost-effectiveness family is an appropriate technique to utilize when making such decisions because it allows different health outcomes to be transformed to a common unit, known as QALYs (quality-adjusted life year). Yet, societal benefits and costs are often not considered for CUA. Additionally, measuring QALYs is harder than measuring the monetary value of life through improvements in health, as is done with cost–benefit analysis. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), also a part of the cost-effectiveness family is used to recognize value in terms of economic efficiency, in that it improves allocation of scarce resources. In addition, some individuals believe that life is invaluable and there are moral problems with assigning a value on human life.
Wright, C. Y., & Diab, R. (2011). Air pollution and vulnerability: Solving the puzzle of
Maniates later elaborates on each factor of his formula, and then suggests that it be used for evaluating environmental policy proposals. The IWAC framework is able to provide an effective critique for Woodhouse’s work, indicating where his argument is sufficiently detailed, and where his argument could be expanded upon.
Wright, R. T., & Boorse, D. F. (2011). Environmental science: Toward a sustainable future (11th ed., pp. 349-369). Boston: Benjamin Cummings.
Importantly, when thinking about the cost-benefit approach, it should be borne in mind that its proponents are not strictly motivated to act ethically, unless the cost of not doing so is sufficiently high, or if acting ethically will result in economic profit. For example, a industrial company may know that dumping chemical waste into a nearby river is harmful to the environment, and by extension, human and non-human animals, although still decide to dispose of their waste in such a manner, as it is economically cheaper to do so, than to dispose of the waste in a safe but more costly manner. In coming to such a decision, they may have also weighed the potential fines and loss of business if they are exposed, although determined that such costs are not sufficiently high compared to the economic savings of cheaper, inappropriate dumping, so will maintain the current method of disposal.
Introduction Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a form of economic analysis that compares the relative costs and outcomes/effects of two or more scenarios. The CEA is typically expressed as a ratio, where the denominator is a gain in health using a natural unit of measurement (years of life, cases of flu prevented, etc.). and the numerator is the cost associated with that health gain. Most clinical studies express gains in health in terms of disease-specific measures, such as number of heart attacks avoided or cases of influenza prevented. Although this is useful for particular treatments related to those health conditions, those measures do not allow for comparison across diseases.
In Title I of NEPA, our government recognizes the immutable link between mankind's dealings and the impacts on the environment. People have an individual responsibility to the world around them. The Constitution assures us "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." However, "life" is undefined. We, as human beings, have the superiority to nurture and preserve all forms of life. Transitions in population growth (or decline), urban spread, industry expansions and technological advances are critical in determining and modifying the ever-changing needs of the environment. Extensive research and planning with State and local government allows NEPA to anticipate, possibly even predict, an environmental disaster before it occurs. These measures are to insure the most beneficial use of our natural resources, to preserve our Nation's history as well as encourage individuality, to search for improvements in recycling our resources and the discovery of new ones. These goals are sought after in a systematic manner to include the most recent available data that could promote or reject proposals for changes t...
Withgott, J., & Brennan, S. (2011). Environment: the science behind the stories (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) refers to a tool that assists in limiting the potential environmental damage of various developments that are undertaken in an area (Handley & Handley, 2001). Other researchers and scholars consider EIA as a key aspect of many large-scale planning applications; whereby, the EIA is used as the technique that help developers understand the potential environmental impacts of any major development proposal (Wathern, 1988). EIA entails information gathering practice that is carried out by both the developer and other relevant bodies to enable the Local Planning Authority appreciate the potential environmental effects of any form of development before giving directions on its commencement or stoppage (Dougherty & Hall, 1995; Wathern, 1988). Therefore, EIA can simply be described as the scientific and public consultation process that helps identify the potential impacts of any proposed project on the environment; that is, the biophysical component of the physical environment.