Incorporating Equity in Regulatory and Benefit-Cost Analysis Using Risk-Based Preferences

Risk Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 902-907

  Farrow, Scott ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

Author keywords

Benefit; Distribution; Equity; Income; Risk

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS COSTS; BENEFIT; BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS; DATA COLLECTION; DISTRIBUTION; ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY; EQUITY; FEDERAL REGULATIONS; INCOME; OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGETS; RISK-BASED; SENSITIVITY TESTS; SIMULATION METHODS;

COST ACCOUNTING; COSTS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EQUITY; FEDERAL SYSTEM; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; RISK PERCEPTION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

EID: 79959282186     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01474.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. OMB (U.S. Office of Management and Budget). Draft 2010 Annual Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Entities. Available at:, Accessed on May 31, 2010.
2. Lubbers J. A Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking, 4th ed. Chicago American Bar Association, 2006.
3. OMB (U.S. Office of Management and Budget). Regulatory Analysis. Washington, DC OMB Circular A-4, 2003.
4. US EPA. Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analysis. EPA-240-R-00-003. September, 2000 (also new draft, 2008).
5. Ackerman F, Heinzerling L. Priceless. New York New Press, 2003.
6. Harberger A. On the use of distributional weights in social cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 1978; 86(2:2):S87-S120.
7. Layard R. Comment: On the use of distributional weights in social cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 1980; 88(5):1041-1047.
8. Harberger A. Reply to Layard and Squire. Journal of Political Economy, 1980; 88(5):1050-1052.
9. Bellinger W. The Economic Analysis of Public Policy. London Routledge, 2007.
10. Jones C. Applied Welfare Economics. Oxford Oxford University Press, 2005.
11. Adler M, Posner E. New Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis. Cambridge Harvard University Press, 2006.
12. Foster J, Sen A. On economic inequality after a quarter century, in Sen A. On Economic Inequality, Expanded Edition. Oxford Clarendon/Oxford Press, 1997.
13. Kaplow L, Shavell S. Fairness Versus Welfare. Cambridge Harvard University Press, 2002.
14. Hahn R. Regulatory reform: What do the government's numbers tell us? In: Hahn R (ed). Risks, Costs, and Lives Saved. New York Oxford University Press, 1996.
15. Hahn R, Dudley P. How well does the U.S. government do cost-benefit analysis? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2007; 1(2):192-221.
16. Belzer R. Project on Regulatory Oversight: Appendix C, Evaluative Criteria for Compliance: EO 12866. St. Louis Washington University, 1999.
17. Cowell F (ed). The Economics of Poverty and Inequality, Vols. I and II. Cheltenham Edward Elgar, 2003.
18. Lambert P. The Distribution and Redistribution of Income: A Mathematical Analysis. Cambridge Basil Blackwell, 1989.
19. Just R, Hueth D, Schmitz A. The Welfare Economics of Public Policy, 2nd ed. Cheltenham Edward Elgar, 2004.
20. Boardman A, Greenberg D, Vining A, Weimer D. Cost-Benefit Analysis, 3rd ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006.
21. Zerbe R Jr, Dively D. Benefit-Cost Analysis in Theory and Practice. New York Harper Collins, 1994.
22. Fullerton D. A framework to compare environmental policies. Southern Economic Journal, 2001; 68(2):224-248.
23. Krutilla K. Using the Kaldor-Hicks tableau format for cost-benefit analysis and policy evaluation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2005; 24(4):864-875.
24. U.S. Census Bureau (Bishaw A and Semega J). Income, Earnings, and Poverty Data from the 2007 American Community Survey, 2008. Available at.
25. U.S. Census Bureau (DeNavis-Wait C, Proctor B, and Smith J). Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States, 2008. Available at.
26. Levy, J, Greco S, Melly S, Mukhi N. Evaluating efficiency-equality tradeoffs for mobile source control strategies in an urban area. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29(1):34-47.
27. Atkinson A. On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory, 1970; 2:244-63, as reprinted in Cowell, 2003.
28. U.S. EOP (Executive Office of the President). Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Federal Register 59(32): February 16, accessed June 21, 2009 at, 1994.
29. Vajjhala S, Van Epps A, Szambelan S. Integrating EJ into Federal Policies and Programs. Washington, DC Resources for the Future Working Paper DP 08-45, Available at.
30. Graham J. Saving lives through administrative law and economics. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 2008; 157(2):395-540.
31. Farrow S. Environmental equity and sustainability: Rejecting the Kaldor-Hicks criteria. Ecological Economics, 1998; 27(2):183-188.
32. Atkinson A. More on the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economics and Inequality, 2008; 6:277-283.
33. Eckhout L, Gollier C, Schlesinger H. Economic and Financial Decisions Under Risk. Princeton Princeton University Press, 2005.
34. Cowell F, Gardiner K. Welfare Weights. Paper prepared for the UK Office of Fair Trading, accessed June 8, 2009 at, 1999.
35. Layard R, Nickell S, Mayraz G. The marginal utility of income. Journal of Public Economics, 2008; 92:1846-1857.
36. HM Treasury, 200X. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. Available at: Accessed on June 8, 2009.