The author's purpose is to review the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in environmental policy appraisal, focusing on the United Kingdom. Examples of the use of CBA in this context are provided, and the recent historical background to its use explained. The main strengths and weaknesses of CBA from the viewpoint of users are then reviewed, and alternatives to CBA are considered. The author closes by exploring some possible ways forward for the methodology which would be consistent with it becoming more useful and more widely accepted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlstonJHurdB, 1990, “Some neglected costs of government spending on farm programmes”American Journal of Agricultural Economics72(1) 149–156.
2.
AndersonD, 1990, “The forestry industry and the greenhouse effect”, the Forestry Commission and Scottish Forestry Trust, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT.
3.
ArmourA, 1995, “The citizens jury model of public participation: A critical evaluation”, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse Eds RennOWeblerTWiedermannP, (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht).
4.
ArrowKCropperMEadsGHahnRLaveLNollRPortneyPRussellMSchmalenseeRSmithV KStavinsR, 1997, “Is there a role for benefit – cost analysis in environmental, health and safety regulation?”Environment and Development Economics2196–201.
5.
BatemanIWillisKGarrodG, 1994, “Consistency between contingent valuation estimates: A comparison of two studies of UK national parks”Regional Studies28457–474.
6.
BatemanINishikawaNBrouwerR, 1999, “Benefits transfer in theory and practice: A review”, Paper presented to Forestry Commission workshop on environmental valuation, Peebles, May; copy available from CSERGE, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk.
7.
BatemanILangfordINishikawaN, 2000, “The Axford debate revisited: A case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management43291–302.
8.
BeltonV, 1990, “Multicriteria analysis: Practically the only way to choose”, in Operational Research Tutorial Papers Eds HendryLEgleseR, (Operations Research Society, London).
9.
BlackABennetAHanleyNNevinCSteelM, 1998, “Evaluating the benefits of hydrometric networks”, R&D Report W6/005, Environment Agency, Rio House, Waterside Drive, Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol BS32 4UD.
10.
ChichilniskyG, 1997, “The costs and benefits of benefit – cost analysis”Environment and Development Economics2202–205.
11.
CooteALenaghanJ, 1997Citizens' Juries: Theory into Practice (Institute for Public Policy Research, London).
12.
CostanzaRd'ArgeRde GrootRFarberSGrassoMHannonBLimburgKNaeemSO'NeilRParueloJRaskinRSuttonPvan den BeltM, 1998, “The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital”Ecological Economics253–15.
13.
Department of the Environment, 1991Policy Appraisal and the Environment (HMSO, London).
14.
Department of the Environment, 1997The United Kingdom National Air Quality Strategy Cm 3587 (The Stationery Office, London).
15.
DETR, 1997Experience with the “Policy Appraisal and the Environment”InitiativeDepartment of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU.
16.
DETR, 1998A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England: Understanding the New Approach to AppraisalDepartment of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU.
17.
DETR, 1999The Environmental Costs and Benefits of the Supply of Aggregates: Phase 2Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU.
18.
DoelemanJSandlerT, 1998, “The intergenerational case of missing markets and missing voters”Land Economics74(1) 1–15.
1996, “Taking account of costs and benefits”, Sustainable Development paper no. 3.
21.
1998Scoring and Weighting System for River Water Quality Improvements.
22.
1999, “Guidance on economic appraisal in the Environment Agency”, Guidance Note 29, National Centre for Risk Analysis and Options Appraisal.
23.
Environmental Resources Management, 1995The Value of Biodiversity in UK ForestsForestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT.
24.
FankhauserSTolRPearceD, 1998, “Extensions and alternatives to climate change impact valuation”Environment and Development Economics3(1) 59–82.
25.
FosterVBatemanIHarleyD, 1997, “Real and hypothetical willingness to pay for environmental preservation”Journal of Agricultural Economics48(2) 123–138.
26.
FWR, 1996Assessing the Benefits of Surface Water Quality ImprovementsFoundation for Water Research, Allen House, The Listons, Liston Road, Marlow, Bucks SL7 1FD.
27.
GeorgiouSLangfordIBatemanITurnerR K, 1998, “Determinants of individual's willingness to pay for perceived reductions in individual health risks: A case study of bathing water quality”Environment and Planning A30577–594.
28.
HahnR, 1998Risks, Costs and Lives Saved: Getting Better Results from Regulation (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
29.
HanleyN, 1995, “The role of environmental valuation in cost-benefit analysis”, in Environmental Valuation: New Directions Eds WillisKCorkindaleJ, (CAB International, Oxford) pp 39–55.
30.
HanleyNRuffellR, 1993, “The contingent valuation of forest characteristics: Two experiments”Journal of Agricultural Economics44218–229.
31.
HanleyNSpashC, 1993Cost – benefit Analysis and the Environment (Edward Elgar, Aldershot, Hants).
32.
HanleyNMunroAJamiesonD, 1991, “Environmental economics and sustainable development in nature conservation”, report to Nature Conservancy Council, Northminster House, Northminster Road, Peterborough.
33.
HanleyNSpashCBryantDMcLuskyD, 1994, “Appraising the costs and benefits of marine environmental protection”, report to MAFF, CSA 2460, Environmental Economics Research Group, University of Stirling.
34.
HanleyNWrightRAdamowiczW, 1998, “Using choice experiments to value the environment”Environmental and Resource Economics11413–428.
35.
HendersonNBatemanI, 1996, “Empirical and public choice evidence for hypobolic discount rates”Environmental and Resource Economics5413–423.
36.
HodgeIMcNallyS, 1998, “Evaluating the Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The value of rural environments and policy relevance”Journal of Rural Studies14 (3) 1–14.
37.
House of Lords, 1993, “Packaging and packaging waste”, 26th report of the European Communities Committee, House of Lords (HMSO, London).
38.
HM Treasury, 1997Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government (The Stationery Office, London).
39.
JanssenR, 1992Multi-objective Decision Support for Environmental Management (Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht).
40.
KenyonWNevinCHanleyN, 2000, “Enhancing environmental decision making using citizen juries”, mimeo, Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
41.
MacMillanDHanleyNBucklandS, 1996, “A contingent valuation study of uncertain environmental gains”Scottish Journal of Political Economy43519–533.
42.
McTernanJ, 1997, “Notes of guidance on duty to take account likely costs and benefits”, Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Erskine Court, Castle Business Park, Stirling FK9 4TR.
43.
MAFF, 1993Floor and Coastal Defence: Project Appraisal Guidance NoteMinistry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Whitehall Place, London SW1A 2HH.
44.
MAFF, 1996Floor and Coastal DefenceMinistry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Whitehall Place, London SW1A 2HH.
45.
MoranD, 1999, “Benefits transfer and low flow alleviation: What lessons for the UK?”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management42425–436.
46.
MunroAHanleyN, 1999, “Information, uncertainty and contingent valuation”, in Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method Eds BatemanIWillisK, (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 258–279.
47.
National Health and Medical Research Council, 1994National Framework for Environmental and Health Impact Assessment (Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra).
48.
PearceD, 1998a, “Cost benefit analysis and environmental policy”Oxford Review of Economic Policy14(4) 84–100.
49.
PearceD, 1998b, “Environmental appraisal and environmental policy in the European Union”Environmental and Resource Economics11489–501.
50.
PearceDMarkandyaABarbierE, 1989Blueprint for a Green Economy (Earthscan, London).
51.
RandallA, 1998, “Taking benefits and costs seriously”, in Yearbook of Environmental Economics, 1998 Eds FolmerHTietenbergT, (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos).
52.
ReesW, 1998, “How should a parasite value its host?”Ecological Economics2549–52.
53.
Risk and Policy Analysts, 1998, “Economic evaluation of environmental policies and legislation”, report to DGIII, European Commission.
54.
SagoffM, 1988The Economy of the Earth (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
55.
ScheragaJ DSussmanF G, 1998, “Discounting and environmental management”, in The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics, 1998 – 99 Eds TietenbergTFolmerH, (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos).
56.
SmithV K, 1984Environmental Policy under Reagan's Executive Order: The Role of Benefit Cost Analysis (University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC).
57.
SpashCHanleyN, 1995, “Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation”Ecological Economics12191–208.
58.
SternerT, 1994, “Discounting in a world of limited growth”Environmental and Resource Economics4527–534.
59.
StewartLHanleyNSimpsonI, 1997, “Economic valuation of agri-environmental schemes in the UK”, report to MAFF and HM Treasury, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Whitehall Place, London SW1A 2HH.
60.
TurnerR KBatemanIBrookeJ, 1992, “Valuing the benefits of coastal defence: A case study of the Aldburgh sea defence scheme”, in Valuing the Environment: Economic Approaches to Environmental Valuation Eds CokerARichardsC, (Belhaven Press, London).
61.
WCED, 1987Our Common Future World Commission on Environment and Development (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
62.
WillisKBensonJ, 1989, “Recreation values of forests”Forestry6293–110.
63.
WillisKGarrodGSaundersC, 1993, “Valuation of the South Downs and Somerset Levels Environmentally Sensitive Areas”, Centre for Rural Economy, University of Newcastle on Tyne.
64.
WillisKGarrodGBensonJCarterM, 1996, “Benefits and costs of the Wildlife Enhancement Scheme: A case study of the Pevensey Levels”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management39387–401.
