Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-13T20:02:08.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Philosophical Basis of Cost-Risk-Benefit Analyses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

David A. Bantz
David A. Bantz*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Emperor Vespasian, presented with an invention to enable columns to be transported cheaply, praised the inventor but declined to make use of the innovation, apparently fearing the risk of upheaval from the displaced workers (Gimpel 1976, p. 9). Imbued as they are with the notions of progress and efficiency, few leaders in the modern world seem to have followed Vespasian's precedent and rejected the promise of technological innovations. Yet the sheer magnitude of the possible consequences of some technologies, and the multiplicity of choices made possible by competing technological solutions to this or that problem have fostered techniques for the appraisal of benefits and costs (including risks) in proposed courses of action. What information do these techniques give us, and what are the grounds for using them to guide decision making?

Type
Part V. Technology and Risk Assessment
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1982 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1982 , 1982 , pp. 226 - 242
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

John Braden, Clark Bullard and Gary Johnson provided comments on versions of this paper, for which I am grateful. The Center for Advanced Study and the Research Board of the University of Illinois provided partial support.

References

Gimpel, Jean. (1976). The Medieval Machine. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.Google Scholar
Green, Colin. (1981). “Perceived Risk: Rationality, Uncertainty and Scepticism.” Typescript of paper from “Living with Uncertainty - Risks in the Energy Scene.” London, 25th-26th November, 1981.Google Scholar
Hansson, Bengt. (1975). “The Appropriateness of the Expected Utility Model.” Erkenntnis 9: 175-193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, R.M. (1981). Moral Thinking. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harsanyi, John C. (1977). “Morality and the Theory of Rational Behavior.” Social Research 44: 623-656. (As reprinted in Utilitarianism and Beyond. Edited by Amartya Sen and Bernard Williams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Pages 39-62.Google Scholar
Just, Richard E.; Hueth, Darreil L.; and Schmitz, Andrew. (1982). Applied Welfare Economics and Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Lovins, Amory B. (1977). Soft Energy Paths. New York: Harper & Row.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLean, Douglas. (1983). “Quantification, Regulation, and Risk Assessment.” In PSA 1982. Volume 2. Edited by Asquith, Peter D. and Nickles, Thomas. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 243-260.Google Scholar
Page, Talbot. (1977). Conservation and Economic Efficiency. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins.Google Scholar
Railton, Peter. (1983). “Costs and Benefits of Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Response to Bantz and MacLean.” In PSA 1982, Volume 2. Edited by Asquith, Peter D. and Nickles, Thomas. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 261-271.Google Scholar
Rhoads, Steven E. (ed.). (1980). Valuing Life: Public Policy Dilemmas. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Rowe, William D. (1977). An Anatomy of Risk. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Schulze, William D. and Kneese, Allen V. (1981). “Risk in Benefit-Cost Analysis.” Risk Analysis 1: 81-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schrader-Frechette, K.S., (1980). Nuclear Power and Public Policy. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starr, Chauncey. (1969). “Social Benefit versus Technological Risk.” Science 165: 1232-1238.Google Scholar
Starr, Chauncey.; Rudman, Richard; and Whipple, Chris. (1976). “Philosophical Basis for Risk Analysis.” In Annual Review of Energy. Volume 1. Edited by Jack Hollander and Melvin Simmons. Pages 629-662.Google Scholar
Sugden, Robert and Williams, Alan. (1978). The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swalm, Ralph O. (1966). “Utility Theory - Insights into Risk Taking.” Harvard Business Review 44(6): 123-136.Google Scholar
Tribe, Laurence H. (1972). “Policy Science: Analysis or Ideology.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 2: 66-110.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos. (1975). “A Critique of Expected Utility Theory: Descriptive and Normative Considerations.” Erkenntnis 9: 163-173.Google Scholar