Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

November 22, 2010

Public Policy and Discounting the Future

Debate about public policy is littered with studies about benefits and costs of alternative public investments. I personally have published studies on matters ranging from highway, rail and defense expenditures to early childhood education and walking trails. Many studies find clear benefits – though an equal number find that benefits do not outweigh costs for particular programs. It is not hard to reconcile different studies on the same issue. What is exceedingly difficult is in making comparisons across different activities at different times. I think the matter that complicates the decision process is shockingly simple in concept – it is how much we value the future relative to the present. In determining what is the best policy, leadership and good judgment matters as much as good technical analysis. Here’s why:

As you will learn in any good high school economics class, everyone values the future less than the present. The antique sounding term for this is ‘discounting’ the future. Everyone discounts the future at different rates. These rates differ not only for individuals, but also for different activities at different times in their lives. This leads to some surprisingly counterintuitive outcomes. Young people typically value the future less than older folks, in part because their supply of the future appears greater. As a consequence they do far more risky things and save less, actually lessening their future options. An example of this comes from the immortal words of my father who advised me that “before I met your mother, I spent 90 percent of my money on women and beer and wasted the other 10 percent.”  He is now a respected scientist married more than 50 years. His discount rate changed.

Public investment is more difficult, since our collective valuation of the future changes with world and economic conditions. On top of that, the future of a public investment is often longer than a human lifespan, which offers up even more analytical challenges. Here’s an example:

Almost all Americans wish to have available to future generations more transportation options. Such things as high speed rail and urban transit are prime examples of popular investments. But, they lie in the distant future. Five years ago these were very popular, but the present offers us a world at war, a country with 10 percent unemployment and a scary deficit. So, the value of a future with these things declines relative to the present without more immediate spending priorities (like unemployment compensation or debt reduction).

A similar problem occurs with such things as spending to prevent global warning. Efforts to reduce carbon emissions are intended to mitigate the ills of an uncertain and potentially distant future. Complicating the choices is the fact that the costs of addressing global warming will be borne by people now, who are poorer and possess fewer technological options than people living 50 years from now. We discount this future more highly relative to the present. Understanding the factors that cause us to discount the future is a key to good policy judgment.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/540/public-policy-and-discounting-the-future

Tags: law and public policy, environment, discounting


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close