Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Cost–benefit analysis" in English language version.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)One may be concerned that Kaldor-Hicks allows for unequally distributed benefits regardless of whether absolute or percentage willingness to pay is used. If policies always benefit one group and never benefit another group, it may not matter how those benefits are measured.
This practice leads to more concerning conclusions such as the lower valuing of future lives due to discounting of future benefit streams. This can have a significant impact, especially when looking at environmental policies that have costs far into the future.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)The final part of this argument is analogous to the "one-person, one vote" voting principle: in a democracy, low-income persons should have as much influence over decisions on whether to undertake public projects as high-income persons. In other words, measures of changes in consumer surplus for different persons should be adjusted to what they would be if everyone had the same income.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)Exclusively monetary evaluations jeopardize future generations through the use of a discount rate that renders impacts 500 years from now insignificant.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)A second, and scarcely less controversial, practice is that of discounting the wellbeing of future generations by means of the social rate of discount....The green critique of social discounting is easily summarized. It is one thing to discount one's own future wellbeing; it is a morally much more questionable matter to discount other people's wellbeing.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)The final part of this argument is analogous to the "one-person, one vote" voting principle: in a democracy, low-income persons should have as much influence over decisions on whether to undertake public projects as high-income persons. In other words, measures of changes in consumer surplus for different persons should be adjusted to what they would be if everyone had the same income.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)Exclusively monetary evaluations jeopardize future generations through the use of a discount rate that renders impacts 500 years from now insignificant.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)A second, and scarcely less controversial, practice is that of discounting the wellbeing of future generations by means of the social rate of discount....The green critique of social discounting is easily summarized. It is one thing to discount one's own future wellbeing; it is a morally much more questionable matter to discount other people's wellbeing.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)