Research: Reviving more than rationalitiy–using cost-benefit analysis to evaluate regulations

November 12, 2021

by Marcia Hannigan

In a blog post for the Yale Journal on Regulation titled “Reviving More Than Rationality,” Stuart Shapiro comments on Michael Livermore and Richard Revesz’s book Reviving Rationality: Saving Cost-Benefit Analysis for the Sake of the Environment and Our Health. The book offers observations regarding the use of cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the effects of regulations on the U.S. and its economy.

Cost-benefit analysis became particularly contentious during the Trump administration.  The idea that some government employees had the expertise and were neutral in their application of cost-benefit analysis was regarded by the Trump administration with antipathy.

The administration ignored cost-benefit analysis in favor of “cost analysis” of regulation.  Benefits of regulation or legislation were not considered. Additionally, much of the cost-benefit analyses done during this period were deeply flawed. Scientific knowledge and the idea of a neutral civil service were also deeply suspect during the Trump administration.  The response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the denial of human-caused climate change derailed attempts to address these crises. 

These views, coupled with the disdain for the expertise of civil servants, led to the attempt to reclassify civil servants as “Schedule F” employees, making them subject to easier dismissal and replacement. The Trump administration was so suspicious of civil service employees and “neutral” cost-benefit analysis that the first agency it looked to clear out was the Office of Management and Budget, the home to the very agency responsible for doing cost-benefit analysis, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).

Some economists argue that scientific experts are too quick to tout the benefits of laws and regulations but slow to acknowledge the costs.  While the Trump administration was not ultimately successful in its attempts to defenestrate OIRA, it did lead to political benefits for those seeking to strengthen the executive branch’s hold on policy.  It questions the idea of neutrality and expertise and has fostered a large political realignment in opposition to both. 

For more information about regulation, cost-benefit analysis and expertise, visit https://www.yalejreg.com/nc/symposium-reviving-rationality-part-05/ to read the full blog post.

Recent Posts

MHA Students win Seton Hall Case Study Challenge

The Bloustein School's Master of Health Education team, consisting of Parth Shah, BHMS, MHA, CLSSGB, Julianna Baldwin and Sheno John, captured first place in the 2025 Hybrid Graduate Case Study Challenge held at Seton Hall University on Saturday, November 2nd. Guided...

NJSPL: Surveying Sentencing Reform in New Jersey

Surveying Sentencing Reform: Establishing Rehabilitative Release Programs to Allow Incarcerated Persons to Apply for Resentencing We continue to showcase preliminary findings from our survey of New Jersey residents on their support for sentencing reform in four key...

Rimshah Jawad (MPI ’26) Featured for National Student Parent Month

Rimshah is completing a Master of Public Informatics at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Public Policy. Rimshah's work focuses on the intersection of AI, data, and public good. She recently presented her paper “MOMCare with AI: A Dual Embedding-based RAG-LLM Chatbot...

Jared Aisenberg (MCRP ’23) Receives MTA Accessibility Award

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently held an award ceremony honoring accessibility innovators that are at he forefront of developing cutting-edge technology and creative solutions that enhance customer accessibility. from pioneering mobile applications...