My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09067
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09067
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:50:57 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:26:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8030
Description
Section D General Correspondence-Other Organizations
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
7/1/1972
Author
USWRC
Title
US Water Resources Council - Proposed Principles and Standards - Summary Analysis
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
195
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />00J332 <br /> <br />21 <br /> <br />achievement of this document and to a greater extent the achieve- <br />ment of the task force document of 1970 in recognizing the legiti- <br />macy of alternative objectives and the legitimacy of making plans <br />responsible to these other objectives, and deals with the problem <br />of how you make your display of benefits and costs, or your <br />information that you make available to decision makers on benefits <br />and costs comparable across objectives. <br /> <br />"Now, I don't know if the implication of this present docu- <br />ment is that you use the same discount rate for other objectives <br />for environmental quality for regional development, and I would <br />hope for social well-being, as you do for the national development <br />objective, but if that is the implication, I would like to know what <br />the justification of it is because I see none myseU, and it seems to <br />me that it is an important gap in the document, if that is indeed <br />what is intended, and, if it is not, what is intended, then I think it <br />must be developed and stated as to what are the principles for <br />discounting the benefits and costs with respect to objectives, other <br />than national economic development. " <br /> <br />* * * * ':' <br /> <br />"I would propose to you, first of all, that one of the major <br />thrusts of the Water Resources Council ought to be to calculate <br />the opportunity costs of investment in water resources in terms of <br />the real value of the resources devoted to water, that is to say, as <br />a price, not as an interest rate, and that that is the only appropri- <br />ate basis for introducing discounting into evaluation of public <br />investment. I would give this myseU very high priority in your <br />research efforts. <br /> <br />"As an interim measure, I would propose that you extend <br />the logic of what you have done and what I admire so much in your <br />effort, and that is of granting legitimacy and bringing to a par with <br />national economic development other objectives. <br /> <br />"As I say, I would go back to what you had in 1970, namely, <br />with social well-being and environmental quality and regional <br />development on a par with national economic development. <br /> <br />"I would extend that logic of preparing, therefore, alterna- <br />tive plans responsive to each of these objectives to, at least on an <br />interim basis, to the problem of discounting, and I would prepare <br />alternative plans and evaluate them with respect to spectrum <br />discount rates and not with respect to single discount rates. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.