IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jbcoan/v14y2023i1p93-113_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

All Cancers Are not Created Equal: How Do Survival Prospects Affect the Willingness to Pay to Avoid Cancer?

Author

Listed:
  • Alberini, Anna
  • Rheinberger, Christoph M.
  • Ščasný, Milan

Abstract

Regulatory impact analyses of proposed environmental, occupational, and consumer product safety regulations often rely on a metric known as the Value per Statistical Case of Cancer (VSCC), that is, the public’s willingness to pay (WTP) for reductions in the risk of developing cancer. In this paper, we ask whether the VSCC depends on cancer survival prospects. We develop a simple theoretical model that shows that under standard assumptions the VSCC is decreasing in the chance of surviving cancer. We empirically test this prediction by means of a stated preference survey, where we ask subjects aged 45–60 from the general population in the Czech Republic to report information about their WTP for reductions in the risk of getting cancer. One half of the sample was told that, if they got cancer, the 5-year survival rate was 60 % (corresponding to the average survival chances across all types of cancer), while the other half was told that it was 75 %. Consistent with the theoretical model, we find that the VSCC is larger in the former group. The ratio between the VSCC of the two groups is approximately equal to the ratio between the conditional cancer mortality risks implied by the survey’s survival rates, suggesting that the VSCC is proportional to conditional cancer mortality. Our findings have important policy implications in the context of regulations that focus on pollutants linked to cancers with different chances of survival.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberini, Anna & Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Ščasný, Milan, 2023. "All Cancers Are not Created Equal: How Do Survival Prospects Affect the Willingness to Pay to Avoid Cancer?," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 93-113, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jbcoan:v:14:y:2023:i:1:p:93-113_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2194588822000215/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jbcoan:v:14:y:2023:i:1:p:93-113_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bca .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.