Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Some Norwegian politicians' use of cost-benefit analysis

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Members of the Norwegian Parliament were interviewed about their use of cost-benefit analysis in the political treatment of a road investment plan. Most respondents found the cost-benefit ratio useful as a screening device to pick projects requiring closer political attention, but few seemed to actually use it to rank projects. Attitudes towards cost-benefit analysis varied along the left-right political axis, with politicians to the left being the most sceptical. These findings are consistent with a hypothesis that politicians rationally maximize subjective, but different, perceptions of social welfare.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Directorate of Public Roads. (1988). Konsekvensanalyser [Impact Assessments]. Håndbok 140, Vegvesenets håndbokserie. Oslo: Statens Vegvesen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Directorate of Public Roads. (1995). Konsekvensanalyser [Impact Assessments]. Del 1: Prinsipper og metodegrunnlag. Håndbok 140, Vegvesenets håndbokserie. Oslo: Statens Vegvesen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drèze, J. and Stern, N. (1987). The theory of cost-benefit analysis. In A.J. Auerbach and M. Feldstein (Eds.), Handbook of public economics, Vol. 2: 909–990. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fridstrøm, L. and Elvik, R. (1997). The barely revealed preference behind road investment priorities. Public Choice 92: 145–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R.W. (1994). United States environmental policy: Past, present, and future. Natural Resources Journal 34: 305–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, P.J. (1979). Straightforward individual incentive compatibility in large economies. Review of Economic Studies 46: 263–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuik, O., Navrud, S. and Pearce, D.W. (1992). Benefit estimation and environmental decision making. In S. Navrud (Ed.), Pricing the European environment, 274–287. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauridsen, H., Engebretsen, Ø., Lian, J.I., Ludvigsen, J. and Spangen, I. (1995). Strategisk veiplanlegging: Oppsummering av erfaringer med strategisk planlegging [Strategic road planning: Summing up experience with strategic planning]. TØI Report 316/1995. Oslo: Institute of Transport Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magat, W.A., Krupnick, A.J. and Harrington, W. (1986). Rules in the making: A statistical analysis of regulatory agency behavior. Washington DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. (1976). The revealed preferences of a government bureaucracy: Empirical evidence. Bell Journal of Economics 7: 55–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Transport and Communications. (1993). Norsk veg-og vegtrafikkplan 1994–97 [The Norwegian Road and Roadtraffic Plan 1994–97]. St. meld. nr. 34 (1992–93).

  • Mueller, D. (1987). The voting paradox. In C.K. Rowley (Ed.), Democracy and public choice: Essays in honor of Gordon Tullock, 77–99. Oxford/New York: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, J.-E. (1991). Investment decisions in a public bureaucracy. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 25: 163–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyborg, K. (1997). Project evaluations with multiple decision makers. Mimeo. Statistics Norway.

  • Nyborg, K. and Spangen, I. (1996). Politiske beslutninger om investeringer i veger: Intervjuer med medlemmene i Stortingets samferdselskomite [Political decisions on road investments: Interviews with the Members of the Norwegian Parliament's Standing Committee on Transport and Communications]. (English summary). TØI Working Report 1026/1996. Oslo: Institute of Transport Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odeck, J. (1991). Om nytte-kostnadsanalysenes plass i i beslutningsprosessen i vegsektoren [On the position of cost-benefit analyses in the road sector decision process]. Sosialøkonomen 11: 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odeck, J. (1994). Hvordan prioriterte vegkontorene i NVVP 1994–97? [How did the regional road planning offices make their priorities in the Norwegian Road-and Roadtraffic Plan 1994–97?]. PAN 7012–1994. Oslo: Statens Vegvesen/Vegdirektoratet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portney, P.R. (1990). Public policies for environmental protection. Washington DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standing Committee on Transport and Communications. (1993). Innstilling fra Samferdselskomiteen om norsk veg-og vegtrafikkplan 1994–97 [Recommendations from the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications on the Norwegian Road and Roadtraffic Plan 1994–97]. Innst. S. nr. 232.

  • Thomas, L.G. (1988). Revealed bureaucratic preference: Priorities of the consumer product safety commission. Rand Journal of Economics 19: 102–113.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Department, Statistics Norway, P.O. Box 8131 Dep., N-0033, Oslo, Norway

    Karine Nyborg

Authors
  1. Karine Nyborg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nyborg, K. Some Norwegian politicians' use of cost-benefit analysis. Public Choice 95, 381–401 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005012509068

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005012509068

Keywords

Search

Navigation