Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the applicability of the alternative way of discounting, such as the hyperbolic discount method, for the economic feasibility test on Free Trade Zone development project that needs intergenerational analysis.

To analyze the effects of applying alternative discounting method in the cost-benefit analysis, this paper uses the hyperbolic discount method and HM-Treasury’s method (Britain), as well as the traditional exponential discount method. Also, this study uses benefit and cost data from the actual feasibility test of the Free Trade Zone development project in Korea, to obtain better policy implication.

For the case of long-term analysis, using the exponential discounting method in the benefit-cost analysis could not give us balanced analytic results, because it discounts too much on future generation’s benefits. In contrast, if we use the hyperbolic discounting method, we could obtain better balanced results since it can control the generational effects. This paper also finds that for the results to be valid, the analysis period must be expanded long enough (a minimum of 100 years).

The major findings of this paper confirm the results of previous studies regarding long-term benefit-cost analysis. Also, the result of this paper is properly compatible with the findings of behavioral economics, such as the time inconsistency of preferences. However, no research has been done with the proper length of analytic periods for using hyperbolic discounting yet. To examine this matter, this paper performs benefit-cost analysis with actual data from the feasibility studies in Korea. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to find the proper length of analytic periods that can be compatible with the hyperbolic discount method.

Climate control needs have reached momentum. While scientists call for stabilizing climate and regulators structure climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts around the globe, economists are concerned with finding proper and fair financing mechanisms. In an overlapping-generations framework, Sachs (2014) solves the climate change predicament that seems to pit today’s against future generations. Sachs (2014) proposes that the current generation mitigates climate change financed through bonds to remain financially as well-off as without mitigation while improving environmental well-being of future generations through ensured climate stability. This intergenerational tax-and-transfer policy turns climate change mitigation into a Pareto improving strategy. Sachs’ (2014) discrete model is integrated in contemporary growth and resource theories. The following article analyzes how climate bonds can be phased-in, in a model for a socially optimal solution and a laissez-faire economy. Optimal trajectories are derived partially analytically (e.g., by using the Pontryagin maximum principle to define the optimal equilibrium), partially data driven (e.g., by the use of modern big market data), and partially by using novel cutting-edge methods – for example, nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC), which solves complex dynamic optimization problems with different nonlinearities for infinite and finite decision horizons. NMPC will be programed with terminal condition in order to determine appropriate numeric solutions converging to some optimal equilibria. The analysis tests if the climate change debt adjusted growth model stays within the bounds of a sustainable fiscal policy by employing NMPC, which solves complex dynamic systems with different nonlinearities.

The purpose of this paper is to examine uncertainty in the social discount rate and explore the conditions favouring the application of higher present value welfare weights in the cost‐benefit analysis (CBA) of very long‐term social projects. The plausibility, or otherwise, of these conditions is an important matter generally but especially in relation to major environmental concerns associated with climate change.

The uncertainty conditions for a plausible range of discount rate values are examined in relation to the social time preference rate (STPR). This particular discount rate is favoured theoretically and has, in the latest EC guide to CBA for EU member states, been recommended for application in European social project appraisal. Value ranges for the main parameters are determined on the basis of surveys of empirical work and expert opinion. Then simulations based on alternative plausible probability distributions are used to explore the future time paths for discount factors.

Present value welfare weights decline to less than 2 per cent within 200 years if discounting is based on the full STPR. However, important appraisal contexts are identified where only the utility discount rate is relevant and this yields non‐trivial discount factors for distant future years.

The main new contribution is a direct empirical focus on the STPR and its component parameters under uncertainty. Alternative sets of long‐term discount factors are suggested for possible application in CBA. The paper will be of interest to academics specialising in applied welfare economics and also to practitioners involved in social project appraisal.

Government agencies have endeavored, with limited success, to improve the methodological consistency of regulatory benefit–cost analysis (BCA). This paper recommends that an independent cohort of economists, policy analysts and legal scholars take on that task. Independently established “best practices” would have four positive effects: (1) they would render BCAs more regular in form and format and, thus, more readily assessable and replicable by social scientists; (2) improved consistency might marginally reduce political opposition to BCA as a policy tool; (3) politically-motivated, inter-agency methodological disputes might be avoided; and (4) an independent set of “best practices” would provide a sound, independent basis for judicial review of agency BCAs.

This paper aims to conduct a hypothetical dictator game with social distance and time delays using conjoint analysis.

Responses from 1,347 Japanese adults are collected through an online survey, and their responses are analyzed using a random parameter logit model.

The paper finds that social preference for the present income of a stranger equals social preference for the income of an acquaintance 140 days later, of a close friend 224 days later, and of a family member 255 days later.

The paper simultaneously estimates social preference parameters, including the inequality aversion rate, the social discount rate, and the time discount rate.

In the context of public-private partnerships (PPPs), it has been argued that the standard valuation framework produces a paradox whereby government appears to be made better off by taking on more systematic risk. This has led to a range of approaches being applied in practice, none of which are consistent with the standard valuation approach. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that these approaches are flawed and unnecessary.

The authors step through the proposed alternative valuation approaches and demonstrate their inconsistencies and illogical outcomes, using theory, logic and mathematical proof.

In this paper, the authors demonstrate that the proposed (alternative) approaches suffer from internal inconsistencies and produce illogical outcomes in some cases. The authors also show that there is no problem with the current accepted theory and that the apparent paradox is not the result of a deficiency in the current theory but is rather caused by its misapplication in practice. In particular, the authors show that the systematic risk of cash flows is frequently mis-estimated, and the correction of this error solves the apparent paradox.

Over the past 20 years, PPP activity around the globe amounts to many billions of dollars. Decisions on major infrastructure funding are of enormous social and economic importance.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to demonstrate the flaws and internal inconsistencies with proposed valuation framework alternatives for the purposes of evaluating PPPs.

The purpose of this paper, which is the first of a two-part series, is to build upon the established research on environmental economics and sustainability theory developed by Ramsey (1928), Weitzman (2007) and Gollier (2010). The Ramsey-Weitzman-Gollier model, with the contribution of Howarth (2009) and Nordhaus (2007a, b), focuses on discount rate development for environmental and long-term assets, linking discounted utility analysis embedded in the CCAPM model of Lucas (1978) to the policy concerns associated with the valuation of public and sustainable resources. This paper further investigates these issues to the rates structure appropriate for exhaustible resources with a particular emphasis on urban land, based upon the differentiation of strong and weak form sustainability concepts constrained by the objectives of the sustainable criterion of Daly and Cobb (1994).

The paper integrates the concepts of discount rate development for environmental and long-term assets and discounted utility analysis to the policy concerns associated with the valuation of public and sustainable resources. It develops new theoretical insight in order to allow the theoretical formulation of discount and capitalization rates that can be empirically applied and tested.

The paper provides theoretical support for a new approach concerned with the development of capitalization and discount rates in the valuation of non-renewable resources. A key concern of valuing non-renewable or limited resource endowments (in space or time) is the problem of irreversible investment or irrevocable decision implementation as suggested by Arrow-Fisher (1974), Krautkraemer (1985) and Daly and Cobb (1994). It investigates the challenge with developing capitalization rates and valuation of depleting resources temporally, within the constraints of sustainability. To achieve this, an optimal control discounting procedure subject to a sustainable objective statement is employed – in this context it suggests that sustainability should be treated as an alternative to traditional growth and the maximization of near-term returns.

This paper extends the construct of developing rates structures appropriate for the valuation of exhaustible resources. It places a conceptual emphasis on urban land development. The measures developed and the insights gained may serve as a basis for future research on the optimal levels of sustainable development appropriate for different nations.

In this paper, we critically review cost‐benefit analysis, cost‐effectiveness analysis and the guard‐rail approach as decision‐support tools for the choice of climate protection strategies. Our main focus is on the central role of value judgments, which arise from the need to value; first, uncertain environmental benefits from climate protection relative to other goods; second, the consumption of the present relative to future generations; and third the consumption of “poor” relative to “rich” people. Each of the three approaches analyzed has its shortcomings. Cost‐benefit analysis requires a complete and transitive preference ordering, which stands in sharp contrast to scientific uncertainties and valuation problems. Cost‐effectiveness analysis suffers from the difficulty of setting an appropriate climate protection target. Finally, the usefulness of the guard‐rail approach for decision‐makers depends on the extent to which it is possible to limit the choice set.

This chapter conducts a systematic comparison of behavioral economics’s challenges to the standard accounts of economic behaviors within three dimensions: under risk, over time, and regarding other people. A new perspective on two underlying methodological issues, i.e., inter-disciplinarity and the positive/normative distinction, is proposed by following the entanglement thesis of Hilary Putnam, Vivian Walsh, and Amartya Sen. This thesis holds that facts, values, and conventions have inter-dependent meanings in science which can be understood by scrutinizing formal and ordinary language uses. The goal is to provide a broad and self-contained picture of how behavioral economics is changing the mainstream of economics.