The economic implications of regulations governing radon gas level identification and remediation in buildings are poorly understood, and attempts to address these issues have been criticised for lack of comparability. It is imperative therefore that a general model for the economic evaluation of radon remediation programmes is adopted to ensure comparability between studies and settings and to increase the usefulness of the results to decision makers. This paper presents general guidelines for the use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) as an economic appraisal tool in the evaluation of radon reduction and prevention programmes. The data requirements for a CEA of radon remediation programmes concern both costs and outcomes. These components are discussed with respect to: programme objectives, comparator choice, perspective, time horizon, discounting, uncertainty, and final ratios. Adhering to clear guidelines concerning these aspects of evaluations will facilitate meaningful evaluation of radon remediation programmes. Finally, by evaluating the radon remediation programmes using methods applied to other health interventions (such as lung cancer prevention interventions), comparisons using the same metric can be made across policy areas.