Abstract
Abstract Part II, “Eight Fallacies of Cost-Benefit Analysis,” detailed fallacies of cost-benefit analysis that have become prominent, in part, because for the past three decades the conversation about how cost-benefit analysis should be conducted has been dominated by antiregulatory interest groups. These fallacies bias cost-benefit analysis against regulation. In order for cost-benefit analysis to serve as a neutral tool of policy analysis, and accurately identify wealth-maximizing regulations, these fallacies need to be eliminated. Proregulatory interest groups, as well as informed citizens, can use these chapters as the foundation of an agenda for reforming the methodology of cost-benefit analysis, in order to reclaim it for the benefit of the general public rather than for the narrow purposes of antiregulatory interests.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
