Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Effectiveness analysis and value incommensurability

Herlitz, Anders LU (2025) In Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 25.
Abstract
This paper argues that in many contexts where effectiveness analysis such as benefit-cost analysis and cost-
effectiveness analysis is used, we have good reason to think that some benefits or costs are incommensurable in
value such that neither can be determined to be better than the other, although they cannot be determined to be
equally good either. Two responses to such value incommensurability are outlined: abandoning conventional ways
of measuring benefits and costs and replacing one-dimensional measures with multi-dimensional measures or
sticking to conventional ways of measuring benefits and costs and accepting that whatever valuation one comes
up with, it will fail to reflect the actual values and value... (More)
This paper argues that in many contexts where effectiveness analysis such as benefit-cost analysis and cost-
effectiveness analysis is used, we have good reason to think that some benefits or costs are incommensurable in
value such that neither can be determined to be better than the other, although they cannot be determined to be
equally good either. Two responses to such value incommensurability are outlined: abandoning conventional ways
of measuring benefits and costs and replacing one-dimensional measures with multi-dimensional measures or
sticking to conventional ways of measuring benefits and costs and accepting that whatever valuation one comes
up with, it will fail to reflect the actual values and value relations between benefits and costs. Both responses are
argued to be problematic. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
volume
25
pages
8 pages
publisher
BioMed Central (BMC)
external identifiers
  • pmid:40269918
  • scopus:105003283124
ISSN
1478-7547
DOI
10.1186/s12962-025-00624-w
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
ba817dbe-d7cb-4879-8af7-a29d7ca27861
date added to LUP
2025-04-24 15:45:26
date last changed
2025-06-01 04:04:37
@article{ba817dbe-d7cb-4879-8af7-a29d7ca27861,
  abstract     = {{This paper argues that in many contexts where effectiveness analysis such as benefit-cost analysis and cost-<br/>effectiveness analysis is used, we have good reason to think that some benefits or costs are incommensurable in<br/>value such that neither can be determined to be better than the other, although they cannot be determined to be<br/>equally good either. Two responses to such value incommensurability are outlined: abandoning conventional ways<br/>of measuring benefits and costs and replacing one-dimensional measures with multi-dimensional measures or<br/>sticking to conventional ways of measuring benefits and costs and accepting that whatever valuation one comes<br/>up with, it will fail to reflect the actual values and value relations between benefits and costs. Both responses are<br/>argued to be problematic.}},
  author       = {{Herlitz, Anders}},
  issn         = {{1478-7547}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{BioMed Central (BMC)}},
  series       = {{Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation}},
  title        = {{Effectiveness analysis and value incommensurability}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-025-00624-w}},
  doi          = {{10.1186/s12962-025-00624-w}},
  volume       = {{25}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}