![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses
Quick Links
powered by 
Subject: | 1. Benefits Analysis 2. Cost-Benefit and Cost Effectiveness Analysis 3. Cost and Economic Impacts Analysis 1. Benefits Analysis - Valuation 2. Cost-Benefit and Cost Effectiveness Analysis - Methodology 3.Costs and Economic Impact Analysis - Methodology |
| Environmental Media/Problems covered: | f. Multimedia |
Authors: | |
EPA Project Officer/ Manager: | Dockins, Chris |
Geographic Area: | United States |
Study Purpose: | Methodology Guidelines |
Report Series: | Guidelines for Performing Regulatory Impact Analysis |
List of all reports in the Series:
1) Guidelines for Performing Regulatory Impact Analysis: Hypothetical Case Studies
2) Guidelines for Performing Regulatory Impact Analysis
You are here--> 3) Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses
4) Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses: External Review Draft
Research Organization:
| Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation, National Center for Environmental Economics | Address: City: Wahington State: DC ZIP: 20460 Phone: Fax: E-mail: |
The Guidelines contain several important advances: (1) they assist policy makers in developing regulations that achieve the highest environmental quality and human health standards at the lowest costs; (2) provide analysts with information needed to prepare high quality economic analyses; (3) develop an overarching framework for economic analyses throughout the Agency and across EPA Program Offices; and (4) ensure that important subjects such as uncertainty, sensitivity analysis, timing, and valuation of costs and benefits, described below, are treated consistently in all economic analyses at EPA. EPA will use the Guidelines to evaluate the economic consequences of its regulations and policies to insure that they contribute to a safe environment and a healthy economy.
The Guidelines address seven major analytical issues:
- • Estimating the value of benefits not easily quantified (e.g., valuing how changes in intelligence from lead exposures result in lower lifetime incomes, or how the protection of wetlands can reduce the risks of flooding and enhance property values).
• Estimating the value of reducing fatal risks (e.g. measuring the economic benefits from reducing the number of pollution-induced cancer fatalities).
• Defining baseline conditions (i.e., contrasting the state of the economy and environment with and without a proposed regulatory policy).
• Examining environmental justice concerns in economic analyses (e.g., displaying economic data on the risks, benefits and costs to households located adjacent to hazardous waste sites).
• Comparing differences in the timing of benefits and costs (e.g., investing in CFC control strategies today reduces future
generations’ UV radiation risks).
• Acknowledging uncertainties in the calculation of costs and benefits (e.g., presenting range of costs an industry might face when choosing among strategies to reduce environmental discharges).
• Measuring who pays the costs and receives the benefits of regulations (e.g., showing how different groups; such as children, small businesses, or persons more susceptible to environmental hazards; receive differing levels of protection or costs).
