The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It

Abstract

Most cost-benefit analyses assume that the estimates of costs and benefits are more or less accurate and unbiased. But what if, in reality, estimates are highly inaccurate and biased? Then the assumption that cost-benefit analysis is a rational way to improve resource allocation would be a fallacy. Based on the largest dataset of its kind, we test the assumption that cost and benefit estimates of public investments are accurate and unbiased. We find this is not the case with overwhelming statistical significance. We document the extent of cost overruns, benefit shortfalls, and forecasting bias in public investments. We further assess whether such inaccuracies seriously distort effective resource allocation, which is found to be the case. We explain our findings in behavioral terms and explore their policy implications. Finally, we conclude that cost-benefit analysis of public investments stands in need of reform and we outline four steps to such reform.

Study on fault tolerance method of cloud computing accounting service platform for middle data supporting cost-benefit analysis

“…At the same time, with the development of economy, the research on cost-bene t analysis is also on the rise. Relevant researchers combine cost-bene t analysis with machine learning algorithms, and use data mining ideas to mine the rules of cost-bene t analysis to provide auxiliary support for decision-making [10]. There are also relevant researchers who establish statistical curves based on cost-bene t data and establish analytical models based on the rules found in the statistical process [11].…”

The Weak Spot of Infrastructure BCA: Cost Overruns in Seven Road and Railway Construction Projects

“…The role of BCA for cost overruns Flyvbjerg and Bester (2021) show that the results of ex ante BCAs frequently are in error; costs are systematically underestimated, and benefits overestimated. With this as the empirical basis, they define "the cost-benefit fallacy" as a situation in which individuals behave as if benefit-cost estimates are largely accurate and unbiased, when in fact they are not.…”

“…In their critique of BCA, Flyvbjerg and Bester (2021) show that cost underestimation is more common than benefit overestimation. This observation should be cast against the fundamental transparency differences between the costs and benefits in a BCA.…”

Political Competition and the Study of Public Economics

“…Sunstein (2013, 235-6), recognizing that politicians and interest groups try to manipulate voters by enlisting cognitive biases, argues that people's inability to properly assess risk provides a rationale for contrary government actions, which may even be desired by citizens who know they have difficulty in such circumstances. 33 He suggests, as do Flyvbjerg and Bester (2021), that decision-making by benefit-cost analysis at least ought to be an ingredient in the democratic process.…”