Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Health Economics (2)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (2)
- Public Health (2)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (2)
- Social Welfare Law (2)
-
- Administrative Law (1)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Business (1)
- Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics (1)
- Community Health and Preventive Medicine (1)
- Economic Policy (1)
- Economic Theory (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Ethics and Political Philosophy (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Health Policy (1)
- Human Resources Management (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Law and Psychology (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Occupational Health and Industrial Hygiene (1)
- Other Psychiatry and Psychology (1)
- Philosophy (1)
- Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences
A Cost-Benefit Interpretation Of The "Substantially Similar" Hurdle In The Congressional Review Act: Can Osha Ever Utter The E-Word (Ergonomics) Again?, Adam M. Finkel, Jason W. Sullivan
A Cost-Benefit Interpretation Of The "Substantially Similar" Hurdle In The Congressional Review Act: Can Osha Ever Utter The E-Word (Ergonomics) Again?, Adam M. Finkel, Jason W. Sullivan
All Faculty Scholarship
The Congressional Review Act permits Congress to veto proposed regulations via a joint resolution, and prohibits an agency from reissuing a rule “in substantially the same form” as the vetoed rule. Some scholars—and officials within the agencies themselves—have understood the “substantially the same” standard to bar an agency from regulating in the same substantive area covered by a vetoed rule. Courts have not yet provided an authoritative interpretation of the standard.
This Article examines a spectrum of possible understandings of the standard, and relates them to the legislative history (of both the Congressional Review Act itself and the congressional veto …
Contingent Valuation Studies And Health Policy, Matthew D. Adler
Contingent Valuation Studies And Health Policy, Matthew D. Adler
All Faculty Scholarship
This short comment argues that both cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) should be seen as imperfect tools for evaluating health policy. This is true, not only for extra-welfarists, but even for welfarists, since both CBA and CEA can deviate from the use of social welfare functions (SWF). A simple model is provided to illustrate the divergence between CBA, CEA, and the SWF approach. With this insight in mind, the comment considers the appropriate role of contingent-valuation studies. For full text, please see: http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/madler/workingpapers/578A59B6d01.pdf.
Happiness Research And Cost-Benefit Analysis, Matthew D. Adler, Eric Posner
Happiness Research And Cost-Benefit Analysis, Matthew D. Adler, Eric Posner
All Faculty Scholarship
A growing body of research on happiness or subjective well-being shows, among other things, that people adapt to many injuries more rapidly than is commonly thought, fail to predict the degree of adaptation and hence overestimate the impact of those injuries on their well-being, and, similarly, enjoy small or moderate rather than significant changes in well-being in response to significant changes in income. Some researchers believe that these findings pose a challenge to cost-benefit analysis, and argue that project evaluation decision-procedures based on economic premises should be replaced with procedures that directly maximize subjective well-being. This view turns out to …