Description
Book SynopsisAll these methods address the benefits of the programs and most compare the benefits to costs, but the types of benefits and their measures vary greatly across the studies and across the different types of public programs.
Table of ContentsContents: Acknowledgements Introduction Thoughts about the Diversity of Evaluations Albert N. Link and John T. Scott PART I CRITICAL DISCUSSION AND COMMENTARY ABOUT EVALUATION METHODS 1. William J. Baumol (1968), ‘On the Social Rate of Discount’ 2. Arthur Maass (1966), ‘Benefit-Cost Analysis: Its Relevance to Public Investment Decisions’ 3. Amartya Sen (2000), ‘The Discipline of Cost-Benefit Analysis’ PART II PROGRAM ASSESSMENT 4. Luke Georghiou and David Roessner (2000), ‘Evaluating Technology Programs: Tools and Methods’ 5. Paul A. David, David Mowery and W. Edward Steinmueller (1992), 'Analysing the Economic Payoffs from Basic Research’ 6. F. Narin and Kimberly S. Hamilton (1996), ‘Bibliometric Performance Measures’ 7. Barry Bozeman and Gordon Kingsley (1997), ‘R&D Value Mapping: A New Approach to Case Study-Based Evaluation’ PART III PROGRAM EVALUATION A Agriculture 8. Zvi Griliches (1958), ‘Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn and Related Innovations’ 9. David N. Bengston (1985), ‘Economic Evaluation of Agricultural Research: An Assessment’ B Modernization and Quality 10. Irwin Feller and Jon P. Nelson (1999), ‘The Microeconomics of Manufacturing Modernization Programs’ 11. Albert N. Link and John T. Scott (2006), ‘An Economic Evaluation of the Baldrige National Quality Program’ C Energy and Environment 12. Gideon Fishelson (1979), ‘Measuring the Benefits from an Innovation: An Application to Energy’ 13. Michael Gallaher and K. Casey Delhotal (2005), ‘Modeling the Impact of Technical Change on Emissions Abatement Investments in Developing Countries’ D Transportation 14. Robert William Fogel (1962), ‘A Quantitative Approach to the Study of Railroads in American Economic Growth: A Report of Some Preliminary Findings’ 15. Ian W.H. Parry and Kenneth A. Small (2009), ‘Should Urban Transit Subsidies be Reduced?’ E Support of National Infrastructure 16. Gregory Tassey (2008), ‘Modeling and Measuring the Economic Roles of Technology Infrastructure’ 17. Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Kent Smetters and Jan Walliser (2007), ‘Mitigating America’s Demographic Dilemma by Pre-Funding Social Security’ F Information Technology 18. Michael P. Gallaher and Brent R. Rowe (2006), ‘The Costs and Benefits of Transferring Technology Infrastructures Underlying Complex Standards: The Case of IPv6’ 19. Albert N. Link and John T. Scott (2005), ‘Evaluating Public Sector R&D Programs: The Advanced Technology Program’s Investment in Wavelength References for Optical Fiber Communications’ 20. David P. Leech and John T. Scott (2008), ‘Intelligent Machine Technology and Productivity Growth’ 21. Albert N. Link and John T. Scott (2001), ‘Public/Private Partnerships: Stimulating Competition in a Dynamic Market’ G Health Care 22. Burton A. Weisbrod (1981), ‘Benefit–Cost Analysis of a Controlled Experiment: Treating the Mentally Ill’ 23. Ted R. Miller, Maury S. Galbraith and Bruce A. Lawrence (1998), ‘Costs and Benefits of a Community Sobriety Checkpoint Program’ 24. Michael T. French, Kathryn E. McCollister, Stanley Sacks, Karen McKendrick and George De Leon (2002), ‘Benefit-Cost Analysis of a Modified Therapeutic Community for Mentally Ill Chemical Abusers’ 25. Bert M. Coursey and Albert N. Link (1998), ‘Evaluating Technology-based Public Institutions: The Case of Radiopharmaceutical Standards Research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology’ 26. Joshua T. Cohen, Peter J. Neumann and Milton C. Weinstein (2008), ‘Does Preventive Care Save Money? Health Economics and the Presidential Candidates’ H Local Public Goods 27. Steven C. Deller (1990), ‘An Application of a Test for Allocative Efficiency in the Local Public Sector’ 28. Stephanie Riegg Cellini, Fernando Ferreira and Jesse Rothstein (2010), ‘The Value of School Facility Investments: Evidence from a Dynamic Regression Discontinuity Design’
