arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Comparing the Draft and Final Circular A-4

Mark Febrizio et al.

Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis2025https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2025.10034article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Abstract In April 2023, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published a draft of revisions to Circular A-4, the first changes proposed since its publication in 2003. Following a public comment period, OMB published the final revised Circular A-4 in November 2023. In this article, we provide a section-by-section comparison describing the similarities and differences between the April draft and the November revision of Circular A-4. Among other observations, we note that the revised Circular A-4 changes the default social rate of time preference from 1.7 to 2.0%, retains recommendations for using distributional weighting in benefit–cost analysis, and retains recommendations to use a global point of view when determining the spatial scope of the analysis.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2025.10034

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{mark2025,
  title        = {{Comparing the Draft and Final Circular A-4}},
  author       = {Mark Febrizio et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2025.10034},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Comparing the Draft and Final Circular A-4

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.