Abstract
Elvik (2006) discussed theappropriatenessofincludingthebenefits thatoffendersgetwhenviolating
traffic laws.Whileconcludingthatthesebenefits couldnotbegivenstanding,Elvikresortedto
argumentation fromnormativetheoriesoutsidetheschoolsofeconomictheory.Inthisarticle,we
present argumentsforomittingviolators'benefits, orlostbenefits, basedonnormativestandswithin
economics schoolofthought.Bymeansoftwoexamples,weillustratethedistinctionbetweenaproject
of increased/improvedenforcementofexistingspeedlimits,whereviolators'timelossesshouldnotbe
included - compatible withElvik'spointofview - and aprojectofreducedspeedlimits,wherethetime
loss shouldbeincluded.Thisclarification ofstandingincost-benefit analysisofroadsafetymeasuresis
based ontheeconomicsschoolofthought,wherecost-benefit analysisisregardedasadecisiontool
operating withinsocialconstraintsandwherespeedlimitsareconsideredasabsoluteinstitutions.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Transport Policy |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 30 |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 |
Research Field
- Former Research Field - Mobility Systems
Keywords
- Absolute institutions
- Neo-classical economictheory
- Social constraints
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Standing in cost-benefit analysis of road safety measures: A case of speed enforcement vs. speed change'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver