Policy makers rely on cost-benefit analysis (CBA) to help them select the best policies and projects to alleviate poverty. But CBA, as practiced in the United States, not only fails to inform policy makers about the best use of scarce resources but helps make poverty worse for many people. International donor organizations—the United Nations, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and World Bank—have sophisticated CBA methods that could better serve policy makers in deciding how to help poor people. The authors look at the results of CBA in four economic development venues—enterprise zones, military base redevelopment, sports stadiums, and business incentives—for developing a critique of cost-benefit practices. A brief program is offered to correct cost-benefit practice, but it is concluded that reform must come not from policy makers and policy analysts who now use CBA but from outsiders who want to influence political systems on behalf of poor people.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bardhan, P. (1996). Efficiency, equity and poverty alleviation. The Economic Journal, 106, 1344-1356.
2.
Barnekov, T. , & Hart, D. (1993). Changing nature of U.S. urban policy. Urban Studies, 30, 1469-1483.
3.
Behr, P. (1997, October 11). Tax break’s crazy quilt of winners and losers. The Washington Post, pp. D1-D2.
4.
Buss, T. F. , & Dwevidi, S. (1997). Military base closings and redevelopment. Economic Development Commentary, 21, 19-26.
5.
Casson, R. (1994). Does aid work? (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
Clements, P. (1995). A poverty-oriented cost-benefit approach to the analysis of development projects. World Development, 23(4), 577-592.
7.
Courant, P. (1994). How would you know a good economic development policy if you tripped over one?National Tax Review, 47, 863-881.
8.
Deaton, A. , & Muellbauer, J. (1986). On measuring costs. Journal of Political Economy, 94, 20-34.
9.
Feldstein, M. , & Vallant, M. (1994, June). Can state taxes redistribute income? (Report No. 4785). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
10.
Fisher, P. S. , & Peters, A. H. (1997, March/April). Tax and spending incentives and enterprise zones. New England Economic Review, 109-131.
11.
Giloth, R. (1995). Social investment in jobs. Economic Development Quarterly, 9, 279-289.
12.
Glewwe, P. , & van der Gaag, J. (1990). Identifying the poor in developing countries. World Development, 18, 803-814.
13.
Gravelle, J. (1992). Enterprise zones: The design of tax incentives. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
14.
Gravelle, J. , Kiefer, D., & Zimmerman, D. (1991). Is job creation a meaningful policy justification?Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
15.
Leigh, N. G. (1995). Income inequality and economic development. Economic Development Quarterly, 9, 94-103.
16.
Levine, L. (1992). Job creation estimates. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
17.
Levine, M. V. (1987). Downtown redevelopment as a growth strategy. Journal of Urban Affairs, 9, 103-123.
18.
Levy, J. M. (1990). What local economic developers actually do. APA Journal, 56, 152-160.
19.
Marglin, S. (1963). The opportunity costs of public investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 77, 274-289.
20.
Maryland Department of Business and Economic Development . (1995). The impact of a Baltimore pro football team on the economy of Maryland. Baltimore: Author.
21.
Musgrave, R. A. , & Musgrave, P. B. (1989). Public finance in theory and practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
22.
National Association of Public Administration . (1996). A path to smarter economic development. Washington, DC: Author.
23.
National Association of State Development Agencies (NASDA) . (1994). State economic development expenditure survey. Washington, DC: Author.
24.
National Council for Urban Economic Development (NCUED) . (1995). Trends in economic development organizations. Washington, DC: Author.
25.
Netzer, R. (1997, March/April). Comment. New England Economic Review, 131-137.
26.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) . (1969). Manual of industrial project analysis. Paris: Author.
27.
Papke, L. (1993). What do we know about enterprise zones? (Working Paper No. 4251). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research,.
28.
Redburn, F. S. , Godwin, S., Peroff, K., & Sears, D. (1984). Federal economic development investments. In M. Holzer & S. S. Nagel (Eds.), Productivity and public policy (pp. 115-143). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29.
Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. C. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 100-134). Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
30.
Snow, L. K. (1995). Economic development breaks the mold. Economic Development Quarterly, 9, 185-198.
31.
Squire, L. , & van der Tak, H. G. (1975). Economic analysis of projects. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
32.
Toulemonde, J. (1995). Should evaluation be freed from causal links?Evaluation & Program Planning, 18, 179-190.
33.
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) . (1972). Guidelines for project evaluation. New York: The United Nations.
34.
Ward, W. A. , & Deren, B. J. (1991). The economics of project analysis. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
35.
Wasylenko, M. (1997, March/April). Taxation and economic development. New England Economic Review, 37-52.
36.
Zimmerman, D. (1996). Tax-exempt bonds and the economics of professional sports stadiums. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
