Four Methodological Assumptions in Risk-Cost-Benefit Analysis

摘要

The results of a study of four methodological assumptions in risk-cost-benefit analysis (RCBA) are presented: (1) the aggregation assumption, (2) the linearity assumption, (3) the partial quantification assumption, and (4) the commensurability assumption. Consequences arising from the aggregation assumption are discussed, including assessment bias in favor of the preferences of those in higher income brackets, and the promotion of technological choices which meet citizens' expressed demands rather than their demonstrated needs. Use of the linearity assumption results in ignoring the role of benefits in determining the value of risk avoidance. Following the partial quantification assumption leads to numerous undesirable effects, including the tendency to ignore qualitative cost completely and the tendency to bias the RCBA in favor of industry, development, and technology, regardless of the merits of the particular industry or technology in question. Constraints governing use of the commensurability assumption are noted. The main such constraint is that the assumption ought not to be held, and discrimination among potential victims in alternative safety programs is justifiable.