these and enjoin agencies to maximize along this one dimension The classic

These and enjoin agencies to maximize along this one

This preview shows page 66 - 68 out of 85 pages.

these, and enjoin agencies to maximize along this one dimension. Theclassic example, here, is so-called "risk-risk" analysis.' In effect, risk-riskanalysis tells the agency to compare the total number of premature deaths inthe project world with the total number of premature deaths in the statusquo, and pick the world with the smaller number. The relevant dimension ofwell-being tracked by risk-risk analysis is longevity. One could imagineanalogous procedures for any constituent of well-being, or anyprerequisite-for example, maximizing the preservation of the wilderness,169. See, e.g., Jay Michaelson, Note, Rethizking Regulatory Reform: Toxics. Politics, andEthics, 105 YALE LJ. 1891, 1896-1901 (1996) (distinguishing between zero risk and de minimisrisk, and discussing EPA's use of a de minimis standard).170. More precisely, this constraint is not a full decision procedure itself but will lend anonaggregative element to whatever procedure is employed. On the feasibility constraint, seeLAVE, supra note 142, at 14-15.171. See, e.g., id. at 15-17; Cass R. Sunstein, Health-Health Tradeoffs. 63 U. CHI. L REV.1533 (1996); W. Kip Viscusi, Economic Foundations of the Current Regulatory Reform Efforts,10J. EcON. PERSP. 119,129-31 (1996).1999]229HeinOnline -- 109 Yale L.J. 229 1999-2000
The Yale Law Journalthe cleanliness of water, the health of the population or its educationalopportunities, or the size of the housing stock.Finally, multidimensional procedures seek to track the aggregate effectof the project with respect to more than one dimension of well-being. Theseare best described by example, since in practice (as far as we are aware)agencies employ only three: CBA, direct multidimensional assessment, andQUALY-based assessment. The idea behind CBA and its refinements is toreduce the project's overall effect on each person to a single dollar amount(the CV, defined as welfare equivalent or as WTP/WTA) and then toaggregate. By contrast, direct multidimensional assessment instructs theanalyst to calculate the aggregate effect of the project along each of severaldimensions, and then to use either predefined quantitative tradeoff rates orqualitative judgments to compare aggregate project gains along thedimensions where its overall effect is positive with aggregate project lossesalong the dimensions where its overall effect is negative." Finally,QUALY-based assessment, a tool widely used by health economists, and toa lesser extent by agencies, to evaluate health and risk-related projects,looks not merely to longevity-in contrast to risk-risk analysis-but to thequality of the life-years saved (or lost) by regulatory intervention.Information garnered from questionnaires is used to discount life-years,relative to a baseline of perfect health; for example, the project of funding amedical program that will enable 100 beneficiaries to live, on average, tenmore years of life, but in a state of considerable pain, might be assessed asproducing not 1000 life-years but 1000 x .8 = 800 quality-adjusted life-years, with .8 as the discount factor for that kind of pain.'73Why should CBA, QUALY-based

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture