Journal of Critical Realism 5 (1):32-60 (2006)

This paper discusses the practice of cost-benefit analyses of transportation infrastructure investment projects from the meta-theoretical perspective of critical realism. Such analyses are based on a number of untenable ontological assumptions about social value, human nature and the natural environment. In addition, main input data are based on transport modelling analyses based on a misleading `local ontology' among the model makers. The ontological misconceptions translate into erroneous epistemological assumptions about the possibility of precise predictions and the validity of willingness-to-pay investigations. Accepting the ontological and epistemological assumptions of cost-benefit analysis involves an implicit acceptance of the ethical and political values favoured by these assumptions. Cost-benefit analyses of transportation investment projects tend to neglect long-term environmental consequences and needs among population groups with a low ability to pay. Instead of cost-benefit analyses, impact analyses evaluating the likely effects of project alternatives against a wide range of societal goals is recommended, with quantification and economic valorisation only for impact categories where this can be done in an ontologically and epistemologically defensible way
Keywords cost-benefit analysis   ontology   critical realism   politics   epistemology   valorisation
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1558/jocr.v5i1.32
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,192
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Prediction, Regressions and Critical Realism.Petter Næss - 2004 - Journal of Critical Realism 3 (1):133-164.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Unsustainable Growth, Unsustainable Capitalism.Petter Næss - 2006 - Journal of Critical Realism 5 (2):197-227.
Sustainable Urban Planning – What Kinds of Change Do We Need?Petter Næss - 2021 - Journal of Critical Realism 20 (5):508-524.
What Kinds of Traffic Forecasts Are Possible?Petter Næss & Arvid Strand - 2012 - Journal of Critical Realism 11 (3):277-295.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Science, Democracy, and Public Policy.Kristin Shrader‐Frechette - 1992 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 6 (2-3):255-264.
The Philosophical Basis of Cost-Risk-Benefit Analyses.David A. Bantz - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:227 - 242.
Costs and Benefits of Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Response to Bantz and MacLean.Peter Railton - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:261-271.
Cost-Benefit Versus Expected Utility Acceptance Rules.Alex C. Michalos - 1970 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970 (1):375-402.
A Place for Cost-Benefit Analysis.David Schmidtz - 2001 - Noûs 35 (s1):148 - 171.
Economics, Risk-Cost-Benefit Analysis, and the Linearity Assumption.K. S. Shrader-Frechette - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:217 - 232.
Philosophical Problems in Cost–Benefit Analysis.Sven Ove Hansson - 2007 - Economics and Philosophy 23 (2):163-183.


Added to PP index

Total views
145 ( #80,773 of 2,507,484 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,983 of 2,507,484 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes