Summary: While benefit-cost analysis has long been the dominant method for assessing regulatory impacts, its focus on individual preferences and on monetary valuation of nonmarket benefits has been the subject of some debate. This panel will discuss the role of benefit-cost analysis as a positive or normative framework. It will also consider alternatives to benefit-cost analysis, including cost-effectiveness analysis and utilitarian decision analysis, as aids to decision-making. Joseph Cordes, George Washington University (Moderator) “Positive and Normative Justifications for Benefit-Cost Analysis” James Hammitt, Harvard University “Prospects for Utilitarian Decision Analysis” Jonathan Baron, University of Pennsylvania “Self-Selection in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis” David Meltzer, University of Chicago “What Does Benefit-Cost Analysis Tell Us? What are the Alternatives to BCA?” Maureen Cropper, Resources for the Future
