This compilation dissertation consists of four essays with the common theme of welfare analysis of long-term public investments. The first two essays focus on analysis of climate change mitigation, i.e., the social cost of carbon dioxide. The third essay focuses on cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of transport investment projects, while the last essay takes a broader perspective on welfare analysis. Essay 1: The Temporal Aspects of the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases. The purpose of Essay 1 is to investigate the temporal aspects of the social cost of greenhouse gases. I find that the calculation period should ultimately be modeled to be consistent with the discount rate and that the “global-warming potential” concept is unsuitable for calculation of the social cost of GHGs other than carbon dioxide. Essay 2: Avoiding path dependence of distributional weights: Lessons from climate change economic assessments. In Essay 2, I explore shortcomings in income weighting in evaluation of climate change policy. In short, in previous versions of two of the most important existing models, regional economic growth is double counted. The proposed alternative approaches yield about 20–40% higher values of SCCO2 than the old approach. Essay 3: Does uncertainty make cost-benefit analyses pointless? In Essay 3, the aim is to investigate to what extent CBA improves the selection decision of projects when uncertainties are taken into account, using a simulation-based approach on real data of infrastructure investments. The results indicate that, in line with previous literature, CBA is a rather robust tool and considerably increases the quality of decision making compared with a random selection mechanism, even when high levels of uncertainty are considered. Essay 4: Household Production and the Elasticity of Marginal Utility of Consumption. In Essay 4, I develop a new model to show that omission of household production in a previous model leads to bias when the elasticity of marginal utility of consumption, EMUC, is estimated. I further offer new, unbiased estimates based on current evidence of the included parameters, suggesting a lower bound of EMUC at about 0.9.

Sports sponsorship accounts for the majority of global sponsorship revenue and is a mutually beneficial business relationship between two parties -the sponsor and the sponsee. The most successful sports sponsorships are based on a good relationship between the sports entity and its sponsor, however, the relationship between the sponsor and the sponsee is difficult to understand due to the lack oftheoretical and managerial implications of the area. Thus, the purpose of this thesis is to provide a better understanding of how sport entities and their existing sponsors manage their interorganizational relationship. In order to reach the stated purpose, research questions are derived focusing on the exchange and the maintenance of the sport sponsor relationship. Based on the research questions, an extensive literature review is conducted landing in a proposed conceptual framework. A qualitative case study approach is used to collect data through semi-structured interviews with two national and two international professional sports organizations. The result of the study shows how the existing relationship between sports organizations and their sponsors is managed. The most valued aspect in a sport sponsorship relationship is to develop a long-term partnership and that the parties involved are committed to the relationship and work actively to make it mutually beneficial. The sponsors are for the most partincluded in the activities of the sport entity, which posits high-quality communication as an essential tool in maintaining a successful relationship. In order to maximize the value generated from the offered benefits, the partners must be willing to utilize the full potential in participating in the sport entity’s various activities.

<p>This thesis addresses the issue of weighted cost-benefit analysis (WCBA). WCBA is a welfare evaluation model where income distribution effects are valued by distributional weighting. The method was developed already in the 1970s. The interest in and applications of this method have increased in the past decade, e.g. when evaluating of global environmental problems. There are, however, still unsolved problems regarding the application of this method. One such issue is the choice of the approach to the means of estimating of the distributional weights. The literature on WCBA suggests a couple of approaches, but gives no clues as to which one is the most appropriate one to use, either from a theoretical or from an empirical point of view. Accordingly, the choice of distributional weights may be an arbitrary one. In the first paper in this thesis, the consequences of the choice of distributional weights on project decisions have been studied. Different sets of distributional weights have been compared across a variety of strategically chosen income distribution effects. The distributional weights examined are those that correspond to the WCBA approaches commonly suggested in literature on the topic. The results indicate that the choice of distributional weights is of importance for the rank of projects only when the income distribution effects concern target populations with low incomes. The results also show that not only the mean income but also the span of incomes, of the target population of the income distribution effect, affects the result of the distributional weighting when applying very progressive non-linear distributional weights. This may cause the distributional weighting to indicate an income distribution effect even though the project effect is evenly distributed across the population.</p><p>One rational for distributional weighting, commonly referred to when applying WCBA, is that marginal utility of income is decreasing with income. In the second paper, this hypothesis is tested. My study contributes to this literature by employing stated preference data on compensated variation (CV) in a model flexible as to the functional form of the marginal utility. The results indicate that the marginal utility of income decreases linearly with income.</p><p>Under certain conditions, a decreasing marginal utility of income corresponds to risk aversion. Thus the hypothesis that marginal utility of income is decreasing with income can be tested by analyses of individuals’ behaviour in gambling situations. The third paper examines of the role of risk aversion, defined by the von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility function, for people’s concern about the problem of ‘sick’ buildings. The analysis is based on data on the willingness to pay (WTP) for having the indoor air quality (IAQ) at home examined and diagnosed by experts and the WTP for acquiring an IAQ at home that is guaranteed to be good. The results indicate that some of the households are willing to pay for an elimination of the uncertainty of the IAQ at home, even though they are not willing to pay for an elimination of the risks for building related ill health. The probability to pay, for an elimination of the uncertainty of the indoor air quality at home, only because of risk aversion is estimated to 0.3-0.4. Risk aversion seems to be a more common motive, for the decision to pay for a diagnosis of the IAQ at home, among young people.</p><p>Another rationale for distributional weighting, commonly referred to, is the existence of unselfish motives for economic behaviour, such as social inequality aversion or altruism. In the fourth paper the hypothesis that people have altruistic preferences, i.e. that they care about other people’s well being, is tested. The WTP for a public project, that ensures good indoor air quality in all buildings, have been measured in three different ways for three randomly drawn sub-samples, capturing different motives for economic behaviour (pure altruism, paternalism and selfishness). The significance of different questions, and different motives, is analysed using an independent samples test of the mean WTPs of the sub-samples, a chi-square test of the association between the WTP and the sample group membership and an econometric analysis of the decision to pay to the public project. No evidence for altruism, either pure altruism or paternalism, is found in this study.</p>

This thesis addresses the issue of weighted cost-benefit analysis (WCBA). WCBA is a welfare evaluation model where income distribution effects are valued by distributional weighting. The method was developed already in the 1970s. The interest in and applications of this method have increased in the past decade, e.g. when evaluating of global environmental problems. There are, however, still unsolved problems regarding the application of this method. One such issue is the choice of the approach to the means of estimating of the distributional weights. The literature on WCBA suggests a couple of approaches, but gives no clues as to which one is the most appropriate one to use, either from a theoretical or from an empirical point of view. Accordingly, the choice of distributional weights may be an arbitrary one. In the first paper in this thesis, the consequences of the choice of distributional weights on project decisions have been studied. Different sets of distributional weights have been compared across a variety of strategically chosen income distribution effects. The distributional weights examined are those that correspond to the WCBA approaches commonly suggested in literature on the topic. The results indicate that the choice of distributional weights is of importance for the rank of projects only when the income distribution effects concern target populations with low incomes. The results also show that not only the mean income but also the span of incomes, of the target population of the income distribution effect, affects the result of the distributional weighting when applying very progressive non-linear distributional weights. This may cause the distributional weighting to indicate an income distribution effect even though the project effect is evenly distributed across the population. One rational for distributional weighting, commonly referred to when applying WCBA, is that marginal utility of income is decreasing with income. In the second paper, this hypothesis is tested. My study contributes to this literature by employing stated preference data on compensated variation (CV) in a model flexible as to the functional form of the marginal utility. The results indicate that the marginal utility of income decreases linearly with income. Under certain conditions, a decreasing marginal utility of income corresponds to risk aversion. Thus the hypothesis that marginal utility of income is decreasing with income can be tested by analyses of individuals’ behaviour in gambling situations. The third paper examines of the role of risk aversion, defined by the von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility function, for people’s concern about the problem of ‘sick’ buildings. The analysis is based on data on the willingness to pay (WTP) for having the indoor air quality (IAQ) at home examined and diagnosed by experts and the WTP for acquiring an IAQ at home that is guaranteed to be good. The results indicate that some of the households are willing to pay for an elimination of the uncertainty of the IAQ at home, even though they are not willing to pay for an elimination of the risks for building related ill health. The probability to pay, for an elimination of the uncertainty of the indoor air quality at home, only because of risk aversion is estimated to 0.3-0.4. Risk aversion seems to be a more common motive, for the decision to pay for a diagnosis of the IAQ at home, among young people. Another rationale for distributional weighting, commonly referred to, is the existence of unselfish motives for economic behaviour, such as social inequality aversion or altruism. In the fourth paper the hypothesis that people have altruistic preferences, i.e. that they care about other people’s well being, is tested. The WTP for a public project, that ensures good indoor air quality in all buildings, have been measured in three different ways for three randomly drawn sub-samples, capturing different motives for economic behaviour (pure altruism, paternalism and selfishness). The significance of different questions, and different motives, is analysed using an independent samples test of the mean WTPs of the sub-samples, a chi-square test of the association between the WTP and the sample group membership and an econometric analysis of the decision to pay to the public project. No evidence for altruism, either pure altruism or paternalism, is found in this study.

有鑑於歐洲各國的福利政策與福利支出相較於其他國家高，歐洲國家多會提供窮困與殘障的人民最基本的社會保障，一般人民亦可享受到基礎醫療保障，在失業時也可以領取失業補助；歐洲各政府甚至會收購即將倒閉的企業或者提供補助使企業能夠繼續經營。然而在持續延燒的歐債危機下，為維持歐元區普遍的薪資和福利水平，歐元區內國家開始採取了國家借貸的做法，但由於國際經濟形勢不佳，歐元區經濟增量未達預期，許多國家原有債券陸續到期，若無法借到新貸款，國家將面臨倒閉危機。因此本論文主要以動態隨機一般均衡模型(DSGE)，探討一個封閉經濟體系下，政府支出進入家計單位效用函數後，換言之政府支出變動將會影響家計單位消費的邊際效用，試著尋找能夠極大化社會福利的政府公債占國內生產毛額的最適比例。我們發現在提高政府公債占國內生產毛額比例時：家計單位將預期未來稅賦繳納之金額更高，因而減少消費、增加儲蓄，所以會排擠掉部分私人消費；同時政府必須提撥部分費用以支付債券利息，所以將排擠掉部分政府支出。另外隨政府公債占國內生產毛額比率上升，整體社會福利水準會逐漸下降；因此，我們認為最適政府公債占國內生產毛額比率應為零。 關鍵字：動態隨機一般均衡模型、政府支出、邊際效用、公債、國內生產毛額、社會福利水準 / In Euro zone, large spending obligations needed to support the welfare state and redistribute wealth in an effort to gain greater equality. Most European countries provide liberal social security benefits to the poor, disabled, basic medical needs and very liberal unemployment benefits. They also own and run large public companies. Under the ongoing Euro debt crisis, European governments figure out the way to maintain the high welfare level by increasing the public debt they hold. In our paper, we would like to investigate the optimal ratio of public debt to GDP by constructing a micro-based dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model (DSGE) under a closed economy. We focus on discussing the optimal ratio of public debt to GDP which maximizes social welfare in economy while putting the government expenditure into households’ utility. That is to say, the government expenditure will influence the marginal utilities of households. We find out that as a government decides to raise the debt to GDP ratio; it will crowd out both private consumption and government expenditure. Because households will expect to pay more tax in the future, they will decrease their consumption and increase their saving; high debt ratio means government should have paid more interest payment in the future. Also as the ratio of public debt to GDP rises, the social welfare becomes lower. Thus, in our findings, the optimal debt ratio to GDP should be 0. Keywords: DSGE, Government expenditure, Marginal utility, Public debt, GDP, Social welfare