Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-rxg44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T03:25:32.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2021

Bent Flyvbjerg*
Affiliation:
Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK and Computer Science Department, IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Dirk W. Bester
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
*

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.

Information

Type
Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable