Some Norwegian politicians' use of cost-benefit analysis

Abstract

Members of the Norwegian Parliament were interviewed about the decision process concerning national road investments. Most of them found cost-benefit analysis useful, but apparently not as a device for ranking projects. Rather, the cost-benefit ratio was used to pick project proposals requiring political attention among the large number of projects included in the plan. However, information about project-related local conflicts seemed to be used much more extensively for this latter purpose. Attitudes towards cost-benefit analysis varied along the left-right political axis. These findings are shown to be consistent with a hypothesis that politicians rationally maximize subjective perceptions of social welfare.