Should Governments Use a Declining Discount Rate in Project Analysis?

By Kenneth J. Arrow, M. Cropper, Christian Gollier, B. Groom, Geoffrey M. Heal, Richard G. Newell, William Nordhaus, Robert S. Pindyck, William A. Pizer, P. Portney and 3 more. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2014

246 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Should governments use a discount rate that declines over time when evaluating the future benefits and costs of public projects? The argument for using a declining discount rate (DDR) is simple: if the discount rates that will be applied in the future are uncertain but positively correlated, and if the analyst can assign probabilities to these discount rates, then the result will be a declining schedule of certainty-equivalent discount rates. There is a growing empirical literature that estimates models of long-term interest rates and uses them to forecast the DDR schedule. However, this literature has been criticized because it lacks a connection to the theory of project evaluation. In benefit-cost analysis, the net benefits of a project in year t (in consumption units) are discounted to the present at the rate at which society would trade consumption in year t for consumption in the present. With simplifying assumptions, this leads to the Ramsey discounting formula, which results in a declining certainty-equivalent discount rate if the rate of growth in consumption is uncertain and if shocks to consumption are correlated over time. We conclude that the arguments in favor of a DDR are compelling and thus merit serious consideration by regulatory agencies in the United States. (JEL: D61)

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/84a21dece373972a4cd021bdd6bf532b55bb14dd

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

The impact of climate change and the social cost of carbon (2018, background): “Arrow et al. (2013, 2014) review the arguments against geometric discounting.”