Discuss the Little-Mirrlees approach and point out the differences from UNIDO approach to social-cost benefit analysis.
Ans.
I.M.D. Little and J.A. Mirrlees have developed an approach (hereafter referred to
as the L-M approach) to social cost benefit analysis. The LM technique assumes
that a country can buy and sell any quantity of a particular good at a given
world price. Hence, all traded inputs and
outputs are valued at their international
prices (CIF for importables and FOB for exportables) which is the opportunity
cost/value of the particular good to the country. Every input is treated as a
forex outgo and every output is treated as a forex inflow. All non-tradable
inputs are valued at
accounting prices. These costs are broken
up into tradable goods and other non-traded goods. Following this chain of
production, commodities that are either exported or imported are determined for
application of accounting prices. The theory assumes that non-tradable form an
insignificant part of operating costs Despite
considerable similarities there are certain differences between the two
approaches:
1. The UNIDO approach measures costs and
benefits in terms of domestic rupees whereas the L-M approach measures costs
and benefits in terms of international prices, also referred to as border prices.
2. The UNIDO approach measures costs and
benefits in terms of consumption whereas the Little-Mirrlees approach measures
costs and benefits in terms of uncommitted social income.
3. The stage-by-stage analysis
recommended by the UNIDO approach focuses on efficiency, savings and
redistribution considerations in different stages. The Little-Mirlees approach,
however, tends to view these considerations together.
Comments
Post a Comment