Thursday September the 17th we’ve discussed the paper written by Els about the use of the do-minimum alternative in the Social Cost Benefit Analysis (SCBA) (see library for the paper). One of the interesting issues described in the paper is the problem of contested knowledge which is explained in the article of van Buuren and Edelenbos (2004). To solve this problem the method of Joint fact-finding can be used as described by Ehrmann and Stinson (1999).
This solution of Joint-Fact-Finding seems very good and logic, but in our discussion we wondered in what way it can be implemented. High costs and long time periods may form barriers to implement this method. It also may need a bureaucratic authority to check the outcomes. The Central Planning Authority (in Dutch CPB) is the authority which checks the SCBA’s, but doesn’t take part in the making process of the SCBA. So if the method of joint fact-finding is implemented in the SCBA, that doesn’t guarantee the CPB approves. The discussion resulted in questions about cooping with uncertainties, using advisory boards, the influence of (policy) power changes every four year and so on.
Next meeting we will discuss the abstract of Andrew.
No comments:
Post a Comment