Abstract
Starting from a concise overview of the state of the art and ongoing debate on economic evaluation, a main though partial conclusion, of current thinking on the topic is that any evaluation exercise should always incorporate a plurality of perspectives on what constitutes value. The main reason is the existence of a plurality of social actors with interest in the good being assessed. Such a conclusion is corroborated by referring to concepts coming from complexity theory and philosophy. Practical conclusions for planning are derived too.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arrow, K. (1997). Invaluable goods. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(2), 757–763.
CEC (Commission of the European Communities). (2001). European governance: A white paper. Bruxelles: European Commission.
Dubois, D., Prade, H., & Sabbadin, R. (2001). Decision-theoretic foundations of qualitative possibility theory. European Journal of Operational Research, 128(3), 459–478.
EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2001). Late lessons from early warnings: The precautionary principle 1896–2000. Environmental Issue Report 22. Copenhagen: European Environmental Agency.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1991). A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues. In Costanza R. (Ed.), Ecological economics (pp. 137–152). New York: Columbia University Press.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1994). The worth of a songbird: Ecological economics as a post-normal science. Ecological Economics, 10(3), 197–207.
Giampietro, M. (2003). Multi-scale integrated analysis of agroecosystems. New York: CRC Press.
Gollier, C., & Treich, N. (2003). Decision-making under scientific uncertainty: The economics of the precautionary principle. The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27(1), 77–103.
Hicks, J. (1939). The foundations of welfare economics. Economic Journal, 49(196), 696–712.
Kaldor, N. (1939). Welfare propositions in economics and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Economic Journal, 49(195), 549–552.
Koestler, A. (1969). Beyond atomism and holism: The concept of the holon. In A. Koestler & J. R. Smythies (Eds.), Beyond reductionism (pp. 192–232). London: Hutchinson.
Laffont, J. J. (2000). Incentives and political economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Laffont, J. J. (2002). Public economics yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of Public Economics, 86(3), 327–334.
Markowitz, H. M. (1989). Mean-variance analysis in Portfolio choice and capital markets. Oxford: Basil-Blackwell.
MartÃ, N. (2005). La Multidimensionalidad de los Sistemas Locales de Alimentación en los Andes Peruanos: los Chalayplasa del Valle de Lares (Cusco). Ph.D. Thesis, Doctoral Programme in Environmental Sciences. Barcelona: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.
Martinez-Alier, J., Munda, G., & O’Neill, J. (1998). Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 26(3), 277–286.
Munda, G. (2004). Social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE): Methodological foundations and operational consequences. European Journal of Operational Research, 158(3), 662–677.
Munda, G. (2005). Multi-criteria decision analysis and sustainable development. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple-criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys (pp. 953–986). New York: Springer.
Munda, G. (2008). Social multi-criteria evaluation for a sustainable economy. New York: Springer.
Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Campolongo, F., & Ratto, M. (2004). Sensitivity analysis in practice: A guide to assessing scientific models. New York: Wiley.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). New perspectives on public finance: Recent achievements and future challenges. Journal of Public Economics, 86(3), 341–360.
van Winden, F. (1999). On the economic theory of interest groups: Towards a group frame of reference in political economics. Public Choice, 100(1–2), 1–29.
Vargas Isaza, O. L. (2004). La Evaluación Multicriterio Social y su Potencial en la Gestión Forestal de Colombia. Ph.D. Thesis. Doctoral Programme in Environmental Sciences. Barcelona: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.
Williams, B. (1972). Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Andrea Saltelli for his precious comments on previous drafts of this chapter. The usual disclaimer applies.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Munda, G. (2010). Economic Evaluation: The Contemporary Debate. In: Cerreta, M., Concilio, G., Monno, V. (eds) Making Strategies in Spatial Planning. Urban and Landscape Perspectives, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3106-8_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3106-8_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3105-1
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-3106-8
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)