Cost-Benefit Analysis

Environmentalists should question any move by this Administration’s EPA to reform its cost-benefit analysis.

Requiring EPA cost-benefit analysis could ensure that regulations do more good than harm.

EPA’s advance notice raises fundamental questions about how the agency should weigh costs and benefits.

Experts debate EPA’s recent move to consider regulating its own cost-benefit analyses.

Regulatory action should be based on accurate estimates of regulatory benefits and costs.

Improving regulatory performance is vital for making Americans better off.

Interested stakeholders may have a role in quantifying deregulatory impacts for agencies.

Retrospective regulatory review should concentrate not only on reducing costs but also on creating benefits, like improving societal well-being.

Regulators need a new system for responding to evolving market forces.

Deregulatory executive orders require a new approach to analyzing regulatory impact.

Recent executive orders undermine the longstanding belief in benefit-cost analysis.

The Trump Administration’s regulatory budget constraint may help improve agency benefit-cost analyses.