Abstract
Especially in the social program area, the outcomes of new programs are extremely difficult to predict, and it is rarely clear a priori which of several competing program techniques ought to be tried. In such an atmosphere, ex post program evaluation methods which take account of possibilities of “learning by doing” can promote the selection over time of those program elements which maximize beneficial results per unit cost. A basic premise of this paper is that recent applications of cost-benefit techniques have frequently ignored learning considerations, greatly reducing their usefulness. The “learning by doing” features of the recent history of manpower and urban renewal programs are examined to demonstrate the plausibility of this premise.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, M., The Federal Bulldozer, Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1964.
Bellush, J. and Hausknecht, M., Urban Renewal: People, Politics, and Planning, New York: Doubleday, 1967.
Blumenthal, R., “The Bureaucracy: Antipoverty and the Community Action Program,” in Allan Sindler (ed.), American Political Institutions and Public Policy. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1969, pp. 129–179.
Borus, M. and Buntz, C., “Problems and Issues in the Evaluation of Manpower Programs,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 25 (January 1972), pp. 234–245.
Cain, G. and Hollister, R., “Evaluating Manpower Programs for the Disadvantaged,” in G. Somers and W. D. Wood [29],Cost-Benefit Analysis of Manpower Programs. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University, 1969 pp. 119–151.
Friedman, L., Government and Slum Housing. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1968.
Gans, H., “The Failure of Urban Renewal: A Critique and Some Proposals,” in Bellush and Hausknecht [2],Urban Renewal: People, Politics, and Planning, New York: Doubleday, 1967 pp. 465–484.
Glennan, T. Jr., “Evaluating Federal Manpower Programs: Notes and Observations,” in P. Rossi and W. Williams, (eds.), Evaluating Social Programs: Theory, Practice and Politics. New York: Seminar Press, 1972, pp. 187–220.
Glennan, T. Jr., “Issues in the Choice of Development Policies,” in Thomas Marschak et al. (eds.), Strategy for R and D New York: Springer-Verlag, 1967, pp. 13–48.
Goldfarb, R., “The Evaluation of Government Programs: The Case of New Haven's Manpower Training Activities,” Yale Economic Essays, 9 (Fall 1969), 59–104.
Goldstein, J., “The Effectiveness of Manpower Training Programs : A Review of Research on the Impact on the Poor,” Studies in Public Welfare, Paper # 3, Subcommittee on Fiscal Policy, Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress, November 20, 1972.
Hardin, E., “Benefit-Cost Analyses of Occupational Training Programs: A Comparison of Recent Studies,” in G. Somers and W. D. Wood [29],Cost-Benefit Analysis of Manpower Programs. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University, 1969. pp. 97–118.
Hartman, C., “The Housing of Relocated Families,” in Bellush and Hausknecht [2],Urban Renewal: People, Politics, and Planning, New York: Doubleday, 1967 pp. 315–354.
Heller, D., “Public Landlords and Private Tenants: The Eviction of Undesirables from Public Housing Projects,” Yale Law Journal, 78 (April 1968), 988–1006.
Hirschman, A. and Lindblom, C. E., “Economic Development, Research and Development, Policy-making: Some Converging Views,” Behavioral Science, 7 (April 1962), 211–222.
Hitch, C., Decision-making for Defense. Berkeley: University of California, 1967.
Hitch, C. and McKean, R., The Economics of Defense in the Nuclear Age. New York: Atheneum, 1965.
Light, R., and Smith, P., “Choosing a Future: Strategies for Designing and Evaluating New Programs,” Harvard Educational Review, 40 (Winter 1970), 1–28.
Mangum, G., “Manpower Programs in the Antipoverty Effort,” in U.S. Senate, Sub-committee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Examination of the War on Poverty, Vol. II, 90th Congress, 1st session, 1964, 235–257.
Mangum, G., “Manpower Research and Manpower Policy,” in B. Aaron, et al. A Review of Industrial Relations Research, Vol. II, Industrial Relations Research Association, 1971, 61–124.
McKean, Roland, Efficiency in Government Through Systems Analysis. New York: Wiley, 1958.
Musgrave, R., The Theory of Public Finance. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959.
Nelson, R., “Uncertainty, Learning, and the Economics of Parallel Research and Development Efforts,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 43 (November 1961), 351–364.
Rainwater, L., Behind Ghetto Walls. Chicago: Aldine, 1970.
Ribich, T., Education and Poverty. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1968.
Rivlin, A., Systematic Thinking for Social Action. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1971.
Shoup, C., Public Finance. Chicago: Aldine, 1969.
Smolensky, G., “Public Housing or Income Supplements—The Economics of Housing for the Poor,” Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 34 (March 1968), 94–101.
Somers, G. and Wood, W., eds. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Manpower Programs. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University, 1969.
Stromsdorfer, G., Review and Synthesis of Cost-Effectiveness Studies of Vocational and Technical Education. Columbus (Ohio): Center for Vocational and Technical Education, Ohio State University, August 1972.
Starr, R., “Which of the Poor Shall Live in Public Housing?” The Public Interest, 23 (Spring 1971), 116–124.
Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton, 1962.
Williams, W., Social Policy Research and Analysis. New York: American Elsevier, 1971.
Wingo, L., “Urban Renewal: A Strategy for Information and Analysis,” Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 32 (May 1966), 143–154.
Wholey, J., Scanlon, J. et al., Federal Evaluation Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1970.
Wood, W. D., and Campbell, H. F., Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Economics of Investment in Human Resources. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University, 1970.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
A large number of friends and colleagues, and some hostile critics, have influenced this paper. Particularly helpful were comments from Lee Friedman, Vic Goldberg, Richard Nelson, and Geoffrey Woglom. Views expressed are not necessarily shared by these commentators.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goldfarb, R.S. Learning in government programs and the usefulness of cost-benefit analysis: Lessons from manpower and urban renewal history. Policy Sci 6, 281–299 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139971
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139971