FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1995820364> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1995820364 endingPage "377" @default.
• W1995820364 startingPage "377" @default.
• W1995820364 abstract "1. IntroductionIt is well-known that the choice of discount rate plays a significant role in the ranking of projects with varying time paths of costs and benefits. For public projects, the choice of the appropriate social discount rate (SDR) is not clear-cut even in the context of short-lived projects in which costs and benefits occur within a single generation. In particular, when capital taxes produce a wedge between gross and net rates of return, should one discount at the economy's rate of return (the before tax rate) or the individual's rate of return (the after tax rate)? In the single-generation context, the literature falls in two camps.1 One camp argues that the appropriate SDR is a weighted average of the gross and net rates of return with weights typically determined by the fractions of resources drawn from consumption and private investment, respectively.2 A second camp argues that future benefits should be discounted at the net rate of return, but that the initial investment should be multiplied by a scale factor so that the direct costs of the project can be expressed in terms of consumption units.3Both approaches suffer from severe implementation problems. For the first approach, there is no general formula for the weights needed to calculate the SDR as a weighted average of two market rates of return (Dreze 1974). Indeed, the appropriate SDR to use is project-specific (Stiglitz 1982). Without a systematic methodology to derive project specific SDRs, the weighted average approach is hard to implement. For the second approach, which equalizes the SDR to the net rate of return, the scale factor--the opportunity cost of public investment--must be quantified. The opportunity cost of public investment depends on whether resources come from private investment or consumption and on the calculation of the present value of the future consumption yielded by a unit of capital discounted at the net rate of return; that is, the shadow price of capital. As Lind (1997) points out, however, there is no general agreement on a specific procedure for calculating the shadow price of capital. Indeed, the concept of the opportunity cost of public investment suffers the same project dependence problem as the first view of the SDR (Diamond 1968).Multigeneration projects such as nuclear waste disposal, natural resource conservation, or even Social Security reform further complicate discount rate choice. Specifically, intergenerational equity, in addition to intertemporal efficiency, plays a role in determining the appropriate social discount rate for multigeneration public project evaluation.4 As in the single-generation context, there are two competing views on the appropriate discount rate when evaluating multigeneration projects: the descriptive and the prescriptive approaches.5The descriptive approach to discounting is a market-based approach. It does not rely on an explicit social welfare function (SWF) or the pure time preference rate embedded in the SWF. However, the descriptive approach works under the assumption that intergenerational compensation through changes in the tax/debt policy is available.6 It is argued that, under appropriate intergenerational compensation, the market rates of return are still relevant for calculating the SDR for multigeneration project evaluation, and, in general, the SDR should be a weighted average of the gross and net rates of return. This descriptive view of setting the SDR equal to the market return appears to underlie the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) adoption of 7% as the appropriate discount rate for federal programs.7The intent of the prescriptive approach is to use the social discount rate as an expression of ethical judgment on how consumption of future generations should be compared to consumption of current generations. …" @default.
• W1995820364 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1995820364 creator A5022162824 @default.
• W1995820364 creator A5032207391 @default.
• W1995820364 creator A5040121920 @default.
• W1995820364 date "2004-10-01" @default.
• W1995820364 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W1995820364 title "A Generalized Approach to Multigeneration Project Evaluation" @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1500606268 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1504220437 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1520655104 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1522476186 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1536235390 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1544202043 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1548237202 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1552699422 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1554842459 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1556641246 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1566612983 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1571759215 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1584737211 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1585516652 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1587268744 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1605888484 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1920722582 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1966392212 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1967442942 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1969698482 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1974519415 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1975499595 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1991137566 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1998941680 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2000112896 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2002804860 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2006333167 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2032951054 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2048849304 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2053246696 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2056050668 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2060726188 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2064015102 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2073476701 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2074690890 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2093140031 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2094769013 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2119369520 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2121322384 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2162239493 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2169050695 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2289142057 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W2291775733 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W3123429162 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W3123784219 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W3124683073 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W3124857721 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W3125035438 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W3136089047 @default.
• W1995820364 cites W1633544063 @default.
• W1995820364 doi "https://doi.org/10.2307/4135297" @default.
• W1995820364 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W1995820364 type Work @default.
• W1995820364 sameAs 1995820364 @default.
• W1995820364 citedByCount "6" @default.
• W1995820364 countsByYear W19958203642015 @default.
• W1995820364 countsByYear W19958203642020 @default.
• W1995820364 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1995820364 hasAuthorship W1995820364A5022162824 @default.
• W1995820364 hasAuthorship W1995820364A5032207391 @default.
• W1995820364 hasAuthorship W1995820364A5040121920 @default.
• W1995820364 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1995820364 hasConceptScore W1995820364C41008148 @default.
• W1995820364 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W1995820364 hasLocation W19958203641 @default.
• W1995820364 hasOpenAccess W1995820364 @default.
• W1995820364 hasPrimaryLocation W19958203641 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2096946506 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2130043461 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2350741829 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2358668433 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2376932109 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2382290278 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2390279801 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1995820364 hasRelatedWork W3004735627 @default.
• W1995820364 hasVolume "71" @default.
• W1995820364 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1995820364 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1995820364 magId "1995820364" @default.
• W1995820364 workType "article" @default.