Priceless: On Knowing The Price Of Everything And The Value Of Nothing

by Frank Ackerman, Lisa Heinzerling

As clinical as it sounds to express the value of human lives, health, or the environment in cold dollars and cents, cost-benefit analysis requires it. More disturbingly, this approach is being embraced by a growing number of politicians and conservative pundits as the most reasonable way to make many policy decisions regarding public health and the environment. By systematically refuting the economic algorithms and illogical assumptions that cost-benefit analysts flaunt as fact, Priceless tells a "gripping story about how solid science has been shoved to the backburner by bean counters with ideological blinders" ( In These Times ). Ackerman and Heinzerling argue that decisions about health and safety should be made "to reflect not economists' numbers, but democratic values, chosen on moral grounds. This is a vividly written book, punctuated by striking analogies, a good deal of outrage, and a nice dose of humor" (Cass Sunstein, The New Republic ). Essential reading for anyone concerned with the future of human health and environmental protection, Priceless "shines a bright light on obstacles that stand in the way of good government decisions" ( Public Citizen News ).

Genres: Economics, Nonfiction, Environment, Sociology

277 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Frank Ackerman received a BA in mathematics and economics from Swarthmore College in 1967. After serving for two years as a conscientious objector during the Vietnam War, he entered graduate school, and received a PhD in economics from Harvard University in 1975.

He was a founder of Dollars & Sense magazine, where he worked as a writer, editor, and business manager from 1974 to 1982. After two years as a visiting professor (at the University of Massachusetts’ Amherst and Boston campuses) and one year as a computer programmer, he joined Tellus Institute, where he studied the economics of energy systems, and of solid waste and recycling, from 1985 to 1995.

From 1995 to 2007 he worked at Tufts University’s Global Development and Environment Institute (GDAE). He was an editor of GDAE’s Frontier Issues in Economic Thought book series, a coauthor of GDAE’s macroeconomics textbook, and director of the institute’s Research and Policy program. For several of his years at GDAE, he also taught in the Tufts Department of Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning.

From 2007 through 2012 he was at the Stockholm Environment Institute’s U.S. Center, also at Tufts University, where he directed the Climate Economics Group.

In late 2012 he is joining Synapse Energy Economics, a public interest-oriented consulting firm in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

He was a co-founder, and is a member of the steering committee, of Economics for Equity and Environment (E3 Network). He is a member scholar of the Center for Progressive Reform, an organization offering progressive scholarship and writing on environmental law and regulation.

In addition to his day job, he is a (very amateur) trumpet player in the Second Line Social Aid & Pleasure Society Brass Band (SLSAPS), playing New Orleans-style and other music at community events and good causes in the Boston area.

Reviews

[Zach Siegert · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was tasked with reading this for a class on environmental policy to inform us about the methods of risk analysis and cost-benefit analysis. I certainly found some issues with Ackerman's seeming hatred for cost-benefit analysis in a general sense, as well as his seeming vendetta against former EPA Deputy Administrator John Graham. However, much of the information provided has given me a better sense of how to value life in both quantitative and qualitative ways that are persuasive to individuals advocating for either camp.

[Becka · Rating 3 out of 5]

Scathing review of environmental economists. Insightful but often hyperbolic statements about the work of economists.

[Laurelin Ottesen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had high hopes for this one, and in some ways it met them and in others it felt a bit too biting to be considered truly trustworthy from all sides.

[Katlyn · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was dry as hell, repetitive and, in a baffling attempt to appeal to the general public, simplified its arguments beyond usefulness to the actual issues. The bias, while I agree with it, against the office of management caused the authors to make sometimes sweeping generalizations without proof and then used these in the arguments. And the only real alternative they laid out was to "think about it" and use a system that doesn't monetize everything. Well, duh. But what? They laid out no specific process that might do so. And if we're talking about proposing this as a replacement to cost-benefit analysis within the government as currently structured, we're going to need a pretty detailed process with logical and evidence-based arguments for its superiority to have them overturn cost-benefits. Though they did show just how poor and illogical cost-benefit analysis has proven to be in government decision-making, the lack of time spent on a solution just felt disheartening.

[Fraser Sherman · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good critique of cost-benefit analyses in health and environmental regulation, which the authors see as a right-wing effort to gut regulatory efforts. The authors make no bones about not buying cost-benefit as the right basis, but also point out flaws such as systems that count regulations that preserve old people as less sound that protecting kids (“We don’t base our punishment of murder on how many years the victim had to live.”), outright distortion (“This list of supposedly insane regulations includes 15 that the EPA rejected as too expensive and never imposed.”) and the practical problems of trying to set a price on someone’s life. Good, though obviously one that plays to my own views.

[Rachel · Rating 2 out of 5]

The other end of the spectrum from the Risk and Reason book I just read. This one attacks cost-benefit evaluations in environmental law. This one definitely added that piece I felt was missing from Risk and Reason: some things truly are priceless and should not be quantified or monetized. However, I felt this book lacked the hard core research/science that the other book had. If a book could combine Risk and Reason's persuasion and preciseness with Priceless's morals, it would be a pretty good depiction.

[Debbie is on Storygraph · Rating 5 out of 5]

Some pretty interesting critiques of the cost-benefit analysis that permeates the world we live in. I agree with the author but it's nothing really new to me. I think I've been reading too much in this area. I definitely recommend it though. It's a very easy read and a very important one. How can you place a price on something that has infinite value?

[Marshall · Rating 3 out of 5]

culture non-fiction

[Jo · Rating 4 out of 5]

econ assignment.

very interesting and very well written. nice explanations, solid examples. i'm so glad i get to read this alongside my textbook (which is fantastically boring)

[Erica · Rating 5 out of 5]

Only about 50 pages into this, but I really really wish I had ready this BEFORE I went to grad school.

[Eric Roston]

A useful and common sense-filled run at the prevailing economic orthodoxy.

[anysaididea]

I read the first chapter for ENSP102 at UMD and found it interesting. I'd like to learn more about economics in general and environmental economics in particular after reading it.