Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering Decisions

ABSTRACT This report provides an overview of benefit-cost analysis (BCA); an application of benefit-cost analysis to the performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) framework; consideration of critical issues in using benefit-cost analysis for PBEE; and a discussion of issues, criticism, and limitations of benefit-cost analysis. Our objective is to provide an understanding of the economic dimensions of PEER’s framework equation. A focus on economic evaluation will broaden the framework so that facility damage in earthquakes can be related to functionality, business interruption and revenue loss, and to repair costs. Such an analysis needs to consider issues such as the time value of money, uncertainty, and the perspectives of different stakeholders. The application of BCA to PBEE has produced a number of important findings. First, an example is developed that illustrates the way in which performance criteria can be operationalized in an economic context. Next, a number of benefit categories are identified (cost of emergency response and loss of long-term revenue) that have not been previously considered in studies of seismic mitigation decision making. Additionally, several critical issues are examined, most notably multiple stakeholders and uncertainty, that need to be considered when carrying out a benefit-cost analysis in a performance-based engineering context. Throughout the report, particular attention is paid to issues of concern to PEER researchers and the seismic-mitigation community, most notably, the differences between BCA and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA). These differences are extensively discussed and illustrated. Finally the ways in which the value of human life can be economically evaluated are examined.

[1]  E. Mishan The Principles of Compensation Reconsidered , 1952, Journal of Political Economy.

[2]  P. Kokkonen,et al.  [Resources in the future]. , 2001, Duodecim; laaketieteellinen aikakauskirja.

[3]  Stephen A. Marglin,et al.  The Social Rate of Discount and The Optimal Rate of Investment , 1963 .

[4]  Jules L. Coleman Efficiency, Utility, and Wealth Maximization , 1980 .

[5]  M. Cropper,et al.  Discounting and the evaluation of lifesaving programs , 1990 .

[6]  James E. Rauch Bureaucracy, Infrastructure, and Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Cities During the Progressive Era , 1994 .

[7]  Thomas LaBasco,et al.  WHARF EMBANKMENT AND STRENGTHENING PROGRAM AT THE PORT OF OAKLAND , 2001 .

[8]  E. Barbier,et al.  Blueprint for a green economy , 1989 .

[9]  T. Scitovszky A Note on Welfare Propositions in Economics , 1941 .

[10]  H. Hotelling THE GENERAL WELFARE IN RELATION TO PROBLEMS OF TAXATION AND OF RAILWAY AND UTILITY RATES. IN: RAILWAYS , 1938 .

[11]  Stuart D. Werner Seismic Guidelines for Ports , 1998 .

[12]  Masanobu Shinozuka,et al.  Life Cycle Cost Analysis with Natural Hazard Risk: A Framework and Issues for Water Systems , 1997 .

[13]  N. Kaldor The Philosophy of Economics: Welfare Propositions of Economics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility , 1939 .

[14]  G. R. Corey,et al.  Discounting for Time and Risk in Energy Policy , 1982 .

[15]  H. Christopher Frey,et al.  Probabilistic Techniques in Exposure Assessment: A Handbook for Dealing with Variability and Uncertainty in Models and Inputs , 1999 .

[16]  Howard E. Mccurdy,et al.  The Failure of Market Failure , 1999 .

[17]  U. Epa,et al.  Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance , 1997 .

[18]  Todd Sandler,et al.  The social rate of discount for nuclear waste storage: economics or ethics? , 1981 .

[19]  Icinqsley Laffer. THE FOUNDATIONS OF WELFARE ECONOMICS , 1951 .

[20]  F. E. Principles of Economics , 1890, Nature.

[21]  Robert L. Glicksman,et al.  Environmental Law and Policy , 2004, Journal of Environmental Quality.

[22]  Stephanie E. Chang,et al.  Disasters and transport systems: loss, recovery and competition at the Port of Kobe after the 1995 earthquake , 2000 .

[23]  R. Zerbe,et al.  Of distributive justice and economic efficiency: An integrated theory of the common law , 2000 .

[24]  Arnold C. Harberger Three Basic Postulates for Applied Welfare Economics: An Interpretive Essay , 1971 .

[25]  Robert W. Hahn,et al.  Risks, Costs and Lives Saved: GETTING BETTER RESULTS FROM REGULATION , 1996 .

[26]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Are Risk-Benefit Tradeoffs Possible in Siting Hazardous Facilities? , 1990 .

[27]  David F. Bradford,et al.  Constraints on Government Investment Opportunities and the Choice of Discount Rate , 1975 .

[28]  Richard A. Posner,et al.  An economic of theory of the criminal law , 1985 .

[29]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[30]  Stephanie E. Chang,et al.  Life-Cycle Cost Analysis with Natural Hazard Risk , 1996 .

[31]  Dan M. Frangopol Optimal Performance of Civil Infrastructure Systems , 1997 .

[32]  Talbot Page,et al.  Discounting and intergenerational equity , 1977 .

[33]  Gunnar Karlsson,et al.  Decision‐Making, Time Horizons, and Risk in the Very Long‐Term Perspective , 1989 .

[34]  Craig E. Taylor,et al.  SEISMIC RISK REDUCTION AT PORTS: CASE STUDIES AND ACCEPTABLE RISK EVALUATION , 1997 .

[35]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  Reinventing the Regulatory State , 1995 .

[36]  L. Robbins,et al.  Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility: A Comment , 1938 .

[37]  R. Zerbe,et al.  Benefit-cost analysis in theory and practice , 2002 .

[38]  Scott Farrow,et al.  Using Risk Assessment, Benefit‐Cost Analysis, and Real Options to Implement a Precautionary Principle , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[39]  R. Zerbe Is cost-benefit analysis legal? Three rules , 1998 .

[40]  R. Revesz,et al.  Environmental regulation, cost-benefit analysis, and the discounting of human lives. , 1999, Columbia law review.

[41]  J. Eatwell,et al.  Welfare Economics , 2020, Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy, Third Edition.