The methodology of benefit-cost ana

The methodology of benefit-cost analysis was developed comprehensively after World War II in connection with the planning of water resource projects (Lind, 1965; Prest and Turvey, 1965). Two related lines of research characterized this methodology. The first sought to determine a social welfare function according to which one would be able to rank the available alternatives (Lind, 1965), but this proved not to be possible. Instead, the analyst was forced to restrict him- or herself to an evaluation of each alternative in terms of some set of variables, leaving it to the decision maker to make the aggregate judgment. The second alternative assumes economic efficiency to be the primary objective and alternatives are ranked according to the efficiency criterion. From either perspective, as Lind points out, the benefit-cost criterion is a compensation criterion.

Results (English) 1:

The methodology of benefit-cost analysis was comprehensively developed after World War II in connection with the planning of water resource projects (Lind, 1965; Prest and Turvey, 1965). Two related lines of research characterized this methodology. The first sought to determine a social welfare function according to which one would be able to rank the available alternatives (Lind, 1965), but this proved not to be possible. Instead, the analyst was forced to restrict him-or herself to an evaluation of each alternative in terms of some set of variables, leaving it to the decision maker to make the aggregate judgment. The second alternative assumes economic efficiency to be the primary objective and alternatives are ranked according to the efficiency criterion. From either perspective, as Lind points out, the benefit-cost criterion is a compensation criterion.

Results (English) 2:

The Benefit-cost analysis of Methodology was after World War II Developed comprehensively in connection with the planning of water resource projects (Lind, 1965; Prest and Turvey, 1965). Two lines of research related this biệt Methodology. The first sought to quyết a social welfare function one would theo đó thể rank the available alternatives (Lind, 1965), but this proved not to be im possible. Instead, the analyst was forced to restrict him- or herself to an evaluation of each alternative in terms of some set of variables, Leaving it to the Decision Maker to make the aggregate judgments. The second alternative assumes to be the primary Economic efficiency objective and alternatives are ranked theo efficiency Criterion. Hoặc From our perspective, as Lind points out, the Benefit-cost Criterion Criterion is a compensation.