COVID-19: Cost-Benefit Analysis and Politics
Osgoode Hall Law Journal, ISSN: 2817-5069, Vol: 57, Issue: 3, Page: 537-565
2020
- 1Citations
- 1,762Usage
- 10Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- CrossRef1
- Usage1,762
- Downloads1,233
- 1,233
- Abstract Views529
- Captures10
- Readers10
- 10
Article Description
The COVID-19 pandemic forced governments around the world to make tough political decisions about the cost of saving lives and the limits of doing so. One of the striking aspects of the debates over these necessary tradeoffs is the relatively little weight individual rights seemed to have carried in these discussions. At first, this might have seen the triumph of cost-benefit analysis (CBA); and in a sense, it was. However, the pandemic has also shown the limitations of CBA, especially in the face of severe uncertainty. This essay reviews some of the sources of uncertainty in the context of the pandemic and shows how, in the face of such uncertainty, different countries fall back onto their political commitments, which include concern for individual rights. I thus argue that rather than being in competition to CBA, political considerations (including concern for individual rights) end up being incorporated into an impressionistic calculation of costs and benefits of government action. I conclude by suggesting that this is where future discussion of the theoretical foundations of CBA should focus on.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85198451675&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.60082/2817-5069.3599; https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol57/iss3/2; https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3599&context=ohlj; https://dx.doi.org/10.60082/2817-5069.3599; https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol57/iss3/2/
Osgoode Hall Law School, York University
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know