Standing in Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Brief Assessment on Whittington-MacRae, Trumbull, and Zerbe debate

• Published in: Journal of Public Policy Studies Vol. 38; no. 2; pp. 191 - 214
• Main Authors: Hwang, Kwangseon, Kim, Gookjin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 지방자치연구소 31.08.2021
• Subjects: 사회과학일반
• ISSN: 2384-0439; 2671-8472
• DOI: 10.33471/ILA.38.2.8

The aim of this essay is to analyze the debate by Whittington- MacRae, Trumbull, and Zerbe on the issue of standing. A concise form of assessment in the Whittington-MacRae, Trumbull, and Zerbe debate is specified and the literature analysis is conducted. The gaps between Whittington-MacRae and Trumbull are attributed to the different scope of views on CBA. Whittington- MacRae consider CBA as a broad public policy analysis, while Trumbull takes a narrower view. Their nuanced angles but complementing each other in other way should be leads to policy knowledge as a guidance. This essay observes that the debate by WM and T inspires efforts to integrate the positivist and post-positivist perspectives then affects the attitude of policy analysts in the field of public management, which reminds us John Dewey’s holistic philosophy. Policy analysts or practitioners need to remap the goal and the instrument as policy knowledge for a goal and policy analysis approaches for a tool. KCI Citation Count: 0