Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorAngelsen, Arild
dc.contributor.authorSumaila, Ussif Rashid
dc.date.accessioned2008-03-11T12:17:28Z
dc.date.accessioned2017-03-29T09:12:12Z
dc.date.available2008-03-11T12:17:28Z
dc.date.available2017-03-29T09:12:12Z
dc.date.issued1995
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2435771
dc.description.abstractThe quest for sustainability has put the conventional Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) technique under fierce attack. Much of the critique is, however, misplaced or based on misunderstandings. Alternative methodologies for project appraisal are often insufficient for making the unavoidable hard choices on resource use and distribution. The paper further argues that it is impossible to formulate any unified and operational definition of sustainability applicable to project appraisal. As an alternative strategy, two basic concerns in the sustainability debate, environmental and distributional, are identified. The paper explores how these can be integrated into the consistent framework which CBA provides. This expansion of the conventional analysis, which is labelled Environmental and Social CBA (ESCBA), particularly focuses on environmental valuation, distributional weights, and discounting.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherChr. Michelsen Institute
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCMI Working paper
dc.relation.ispartofseriesWP 1995: 1
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysis
dc.subjectProject appraisal
dc.subjectEnvironmental assessments
dc.subjectSustainable development
dc.subjectEnvironmental economics
dc.titleHard Methods for Soft Policies. Environmental and Social Cost-Benefit Analysis
dc.typeWorking paper


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel