<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>3. Decision-Making and Cost-Benefit Analysis</title>
<link>https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/114978</link>
<description/>
<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 14:28:23 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:date>2026-04-11T14:28:23Z</dc:date>
<item>
<title>Trade-off Analysis (with a revised Rawlsian Decision-making Philosophy) as an Alternative to Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) in Socio-technical Decisions</title>
<link>https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131182</link>
<description>Trade-off Analysis (with a revised Rawlsian Decision-making Philosophy) as an Alternative to Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) in Socio-technical Decisions
Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Nicholas A.; Söderbaum, Peter
This paper discusses the concept of trade-off analysis as an alternative to cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in socio-technical decisions. The concept of trade-off analysis is not new, but increasing dissatisfaction with CBA as the centerpiece of decision analysis and concerns for Rawlsian equity warrant its reintroduction into decision-making. As a decision-support tool, trade-off analysis [1] allows decision-makers to avoid monetizing and aggregating non-monetary factors over time; [2] invites the involvement of stakeholders into policy debates since there is greater transparency as to who benefits and who is harmed by a particular policy; [3] enables analysts to undertake a comparative analysis of alternatives over time; and [4] takes into account the important role of technological change in shaping the state and performance of a system. In addition, a revised Rawlsian approach to incorporating equity and environmental considerations into decision-making is advocated as a way of promoting sustainable development.&#13;
&#13;
While the proposed framework has yet to be applied on a wide scale, the authors believe it approximates the way that decisions are actually made in the political system and holds the potential to assist with decision-making for sustainable development in a broad variety of contexts.
</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131182</guid>
<dc:date>2008-02-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Alternatives to Cost-Benefit Analysis in Regulatory Decisions</title>
<link>https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130648</link>
<description>Alternatives to Cost-Benefit Analysis in Regulatory Decisions
Ashford, Nicholas A.
</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130648</guid>
<dc:date>1981-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Compliance Costs: The Neglected Issue of Technological Innovation</title>
<link>https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/116848</link>
<description>Compliance Costs: The Neglected Issue of Technological Innovation
Ashford, Nicholas A.
</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/116848</guid>
<dc:date>1999-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
