10. The benefit-cost ratio criterion 7 d. 11. A no-cost improvement 5 12. a. b. 13. a. b. C. d. a. The without case in benefit-cost analysis is important because it tells us what would happen if we do not adopt the new project or policy. is the same as the before case. does not requires the forecasting of future events. important because we need to subtract the net benefits of this case from those of the new project or policy in order to determine incremental net benefits. The Positive Net Present Value criterion b. C. d. a. b. C. d. requires that the benefit-cost ratio > 0. and the NPV criterion yield exactly the same results when comparing projects. can be derived from the NPV criterion. gives a value in year zero dollars. a. b. C. occurs when the opportunity cost of resources are zero. results from laws and regulations that benefit certain groups in society for political reasons. usually requires some sort of political compensation in order to achieve social efficiency. is a perfect example of where the criteria of political costs and benefits is important 314. In the case of nuisance 1 d. requires that the present value of net benefits > 1. and the benefit-cost ratio cannot be used to rank projects. cannot be used to derive the Benefit-Cost ratio criterion. gives a value in year zero dollars. both the injurer (defendant) and the injured party (plaintiff) have the duty to take precautions against a harm. the case involves harms to property. the legal standard does not come into play with this type of torte liability the injured party must sue the injurer right away or else