Skip to main content
Log in

From scholarly idea to budgetary institution: the emergence of cost-benefit analysis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Constitutional Political Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is typically portrayed as a technique for promoting efficiency in government. We don’t deny that CBA can be used in this manner, but instead focus on a different property of CBA, namely, its evolution from scholarly musings into a framing institution within which budgetary processes operate. The evolution of CBA into institutional status, moreover, shows the value of bringing a polyarchical perspective to bear on fiscal organization, wherein budgetary outcomes emerge through structured interaction among participants. CBA is a product of interaction within a political ecology, as distinct from being the product of some person’s optimizing choice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a still valuable survey of CBA, see Prest and Turvey (1965).

  2. Karl Marx’s 1883 letter to his son-in-law Paul Lafargue, in which he declares “I am not a Marxist” comes to mind.

  3. Elinor Ostrom (2005) emphasizes the nesting of institutions.

References

  • Alchian, A. A. (1950). Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory. The Journal of Political Economy, 58, 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. G., & Settle, R. F. (1977). Benefit-cost analysis: A practical guide. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, J. G., & Wagner, R. E. (1987). The cameralists: A public choice perspective. Public Choice, 53, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (2000). A comment on the conference on cost-benefit analysis. The Journal of Legal Studies, 29, 1149–1152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daiches, D., Jones, P., & Jones, J. (1986). A hotbed of genius: The Scottish enlightenment, 1730–1790. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dam, K. W. (1977). The American fiscal constitution. University of Chicago Law Review, 44, 271–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jouvenal, B. (1961). The chairman’s problem. American Political Science Review, 55, 368–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupuit, J. (1844, 1952). On the measurement of utility of public works. International Economic Papers, 2, 83–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekelund, R. B., & Hébert, R. F. (1999). Secret origins of modern microeconomics: Dupuit and the engineers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuguitt, D., & Wilcox, S. J. (1999). Cost-benefit analysis for public sector decision makers. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R. W., & Dudley, P. (2004). How well does the government do cost-benefit analysis? Working Paper, AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies.

  • Hahn, R. W., & Litan, R. E. (2007). The president’s new executive order on regulation. The Economists’ Voice, 4(2), Article 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanke, S., & Walker, R. (1974). Benefit-cost analysis reconsidered: An evaluation of the mid-state project. Water Resources Research, 10, 898–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haveman, R. H., & Margolis, J. (Eds.). (1977). Public expenditure and policy analysis (2nd ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally.

  • Hitch, C. J., & McKean, R. N. (1960). The economics of defense in the nuclear age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howitt, P., & Clower, R. W. (2000). The emergence of economic organization. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 41, 55–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layard, R., & Glassiter, S. (Eds.). (1994). Cost-benefit analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Majone, G., & Wildavsky, A. (1978). Implementation as evolution. In H. E. Freeman (Ed.), Policy studies annual review (Vol. 2). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKean, R. N. (1958). Efficiency in government through systems analysis. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menger, C. (1892). On the origin of money. The Economic Journal, 2, 239–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. C., & Yandle, B. (Eds.). (1979). Benefit-cost analyses of social regulation. American Enterprise Institute: Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishan, E. J. (1976). Cost-benefit analysis. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgenstern, R. D. (1997). Economic analyses at EPA: Assessing regulatory impact. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyborg, K. (1998). Some Norwegian politicians’ use of cost-benefit analysis. Public Choice, 95, 381–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, V. (1973). The intellectual crisis in American public administration. University, AL: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, V., Feeny, D., & Picht, H. (1988). Rethinking institutional analysis and development. San Francisco: ICS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, E. A. (2002). Controlling agencies with net-benefit accounts. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150, 1473–1488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prest, A. R., & Turvey, R. (1965). Cost-benefit analysis: A survey. The Economic Journal, 75(300), 683–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites, and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, H. S. (2000). The stupidity of the cost-benefit standard. The Journal of Legal Studies, 29, 971–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, L. (1952). The theory of economic policy in English classical political economy. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, W. J. (1966). The classical theory of economic policy. Cleveland: World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassone, P. G., & Schaffer, W. A. (1978). Cost-benefit analysis: A handbook. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, A. A. (1989). Benefit-cost analysis: A political economy approach. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultze, C. L. (1977). The public use of private interest. Washington: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. E. (2005). Self-governance, polycentrism, and federalism: Recurring themes in Vincent Ostrom’s scholarly oeuvre. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 57, 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. E. (2007). Fiscal sociology and the theory of public finance. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidenbaum, M. (1997). Regulatory process reform from Ford to Clinton. Regulation, 20(1), 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingast, B. R., & Marshall, W. J. (1988). The industrial organization of congress; or, why legislatures, like firms, are not organized as markets. The Journal of Political Economy, 96(1), 132–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. Little, Brown: Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, A. (1972). Benefit-cost analysis: Bastard science? And/or insidious poison in the body politik? Journal of Public Economics, 1, 199–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard E. Wagner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Makowsky, M.D., Wagner, R.E. From scholarly idea to budgetary institution: the emergence of cost-benefit analysis. Const Polit Econ 20, 57–70 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-008-9051-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-008-9051-7

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation