Professor David Weimer taught hundreds of students at the La Follette School and inspired countless others through his pioneering research in the field of cost-benefit analysis. Following his retirement at the end of 2025, we asked him some questions about his exceptional career.
What sparked your academic interest in studying public policy analysis, and in particular, cost-benefit analysis?
As an undergraduate, I very much enjoyed my engineering courses. However, after working a few summers doing laboratory research, I realized I wanted to do something more related to social problems. I added a second major in urban studies and thought I would do graduate work in urban planning. I was fortunate that a couple of my professors urged me to consider one of the new programs in public policy, which brought me to the Goldman School at UC Berkeley. There I was, immersed in policy analysis, including some cost-benefit analysis. Aidan Vining and I included a chapter on cost-benefit analysis in our policy analysis text, which led to collaborating with Tony Boardman and David Greenberg to write a separate cost-benefit text.
I began teaching cost-benefit analysis when I arrived at La Follette. The first year, I had students work on projects I framed. Before the second year, however, I was contacted by Becky Young, a renowned Wisconsin criminal justice reformer, who suggested projects for actual clients. This began the practice of doing all projects for clients. One of my great joys has been co-teaching cost-benefit analysis in recent years with my colleague Morgan Edwards so that we could accommodate more clients.
What are some ways that cost-benefit analysis scholarship has changed since you entered the field?
There have been three major expansions in the application of cost-benefit analysis since I entered the field. A first expansion was initiated by President Reagan, and reinforced by most subsequent presidents, through the requirement that major rules proposed by regulatory agencies be supported with cost-benefit analyses.
A second expansion was related to demands for methods to monetize environmental damages in the wake of the Exxon-Valdez oil spill in 1989. It resulted in big investments by both plaintiffs and defendants in the development of widely used and accepted stated preference methods, such as contingent valuation surveys, to value non-market impacts of policies.
The third expansion contributed to the greater application of cost-benefit analysis to social policies. In 2008, Aidan Vining and I were invited by the MacArthur Foundation to assess the current state of benefit measurement of social policy impacts and identify topics for future research. In addition to supporting the work that we published in Investing in the Disadvantaged, the MacArthur Foundation supported the creation of the Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis and the Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis. We now see cost-benefit analysis routinely applied in a wide range of social policy areas.
What will you remember most about your time at the La Follette School?
I will remember my good fortune in having smart and dedicated colleagues who were committed to training students who wanted to do good to do it well.
What do you hope your students and colleagues will remember most about their time working with you?
I hope my students will remember me as someone who helped them become more effective policy analysts.
Looking back over your career, which research project was the most fun?
Many of my projects were fun, but the one that stands out was my work first with a number of my former students to estimate the value of statistical dog life and then with Aidan Vining to write Dog Economics: Perspectives on Our Canine Relationships.
What are you looking forward to in retirement?
Although I will continue several scholarly projects, I plan to spend more time with my wife, dog, and playing Go.