“Just give me a number!” Practical values for the social discount rate

By Mark A. Moore, A. Boardman, Aidan R. Vining, D. Weimer, D. Greenberg. 2004

225 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/09f110b62d6bb7d79776888757c97b581838502b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Theory and Practice in the Choice of Social Discount Rate for Cost-benefit Analysis: A Survey (2007, unknown): “A good proxy for this is the real pretax rate on top-rated corporate bonds (Moore et al. 2004).”
The Economic Value of Opportunity Youth (2012, methodology): “All present values are calculated using a 3.5% discount rate as recommended by Moore et al. (2004).”
100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World (2017, unknown): “In support of this, Moore and Diaz (2015), in another recent re-analysis of the SCC, find that incorporating the effect of climate change on the rate of economic growth – a feedback typically not included in standard low-end estimates of the SCC – can dramatically increase the SCC to hundreds of dol”
The High Cost of Low Educational Performance: The Long-Run Economic Impact of Improving PISA Outcomes. (2010, methodology): “As a practical value for the social discount rate in cost-benefit analysis (derived from an optimal growth rate model), Moore et al. (2004) suggest using a time-declining scale of discount rates for intergenerational projects that do not crowd out private investment, starting with 3.5% for years…”
How Much Do Educational Outcomes Matter in OECD Countries? (2011, unknown): “17 As a practical value for the social discount rate in cost-benefit analysis (derived from an optimal growth rate model), Moore et al. (2004) suggest using a time-declining scale of discount rates for intergenerational projects that do not crowd out private investment, starting with 3.”
The High/Scope Perry Preschool Program (2006, methodology): “Tables 9 and 10 report the full cost-benefit analyses, using discount rates of 3 percent and 7 percent respectively (the latter rate being very conservative, see Moore et al. 2004).”
Constrained after college: Student loans and early-career occupational choices (2011, unknown): “The lifetime earnings figure is the mean present discounted value and is computed from cross-sectional data on individuals aged 25-65 from the 2003 and 2004 March Current Population Surveys, assuming a real interest rate of 3.5% (Moore et al. 2004) and productivity growth of 1.5%.”