IT IS NOTED THAT THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN COST-BENEFIT ASSESSMENT HAS LED TO AN INCREASING DISPLACEMENT OF LAWYERS BY SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS IN DECISIONMAKING ROLES. ALTHOUGH ACKNOWLEDGED FACTUAL ACCURACY IS CRUCIAL IN MEASURING THE CONSEQUENCES AND BENEFITS OF A PARTICULAR TECHNOLOGICAL APPLICATION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE, IT IS INDICATED THAT MORAL AND LEGAL VALUES AND COMPROMISE DECISIONS MUST ALSO DICTATE THE FORM OF A PARTICULAR ACTION IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AFTER A PARTICULAR TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN SCIENTIFICALLY ASSESSED. NONSCIENTIFIC ASPECTS OF DECISIONMAKING MENTIONED INCLUDE DETERMINATION OF THE PURPOSE OF THE COST-BENEFIT ASSESSMENT, RESOLUTION OF THE INHERENT UNCERTAINTY OF CERTAIN RISKS, MAKING A CHOICE OF ACTION AT OR SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE EXTREMES OF COMPLETE PROHIBITION AND UNRESTRAINED USE OF A PRODUCT OR ACTIVITY ASSESSED, AND DETERMINATION OF WHAT WEIGHT SHOULD BE GIVEN TO ESTIMATES OF TIME REQUIRED TO ELIMINATE RISKS OR DEVELOP A SAFER ALTERNATIVE. IT IS ARGUED THAT WHILE COST-BENEFIT ASSESSMENT MUST BE BASED ON AUTHORITATIVELY QUANTIFIED EXAMINATIONS OF BOTH COSTS AND BENEFITS, POLICY MUST FINALLY BE FORMULATED WITH DUE CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO MORAL, POLITICAL, AND VALUE JUDGEMENTS. SUCH ASPECTS OF THE DECISIONMAKING PROCESS ARE BELIEVED TO REQUIRE THE SKILLS AND PERSPECTIVES OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION.