IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/harjfk/16-033.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficient Warnings, Not "Wolf or Rabbit" Warnings

Author

Listed:
  • Robinson, Lisa A.

    (Harvard University)

  • Viscusi, W. Kip

    (Vanderbilt University)

  • Zeckhauser, Richard J.

    (Harvard University)

Abstract

Governments often require that products carry warnings to inform people about risks. The warnings approach, as opposed to the command and control approach to risk regulation, functions as a decentralized regulatory mechanism that empowers individuals to make decisions that take into account their own circumstances and preferences. Thus, individuals will be aware of the risks and the value of taking precautions, and they may avoid a product that others consume if they find the risk unacceptable. Ideally, warnings would allow individuals to assess both their personal level of risk and the benefits they will receive from another unit of consumption. Then those receiving positive expected benefits will consume more; those receiving negative net benefits will curtail their consumption. Only Pangloss would be happy with the current warning system. It fails miserably at distinguishing between large and small risks; that is to say between wolves and rabbits. Such a system is of little value, since people quickly learn to ignore a warning, given that rabbits, which pose little danger, are many times more plentiful than wolves. When a wolf is truly present, people all too often ignore the warning, having been conditioned to believe that such warnings rarely connote a serious threat. We illustrate the clumsy-discrimination issue with examples related to cigarette labeling, mercury in seafood, trans fat in food, and California's Proposition 65. We argue that the decision to require a warning and the wording of the warning should be designed in a manner that will lead consumers to roughly assess their accurate risk level, or to at least distinguish between serious and mild risks. Empowering individuals to make appropriate risk decisions is a worthwhile goal. The present system fails to provide them with the requisite information.

Suggested Citation

  • Robinson, Lisa A. & Viscusi, W. Kip & Zeckhauser, Richard J., 2016. "Efficient Warnings, Not "Wolf or Rabbit" Warnings," Working Paper Series 16-033, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:16-033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1418
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cutler, David M. & Jessup, Amber & Kenkel, Donald & Starr, Martha A., 2015. "Valuing Regulations Affecting Addictive or Habitual Goods," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 247-280, July.
    2. Wesley A. Magat & W. Kip Viscusi, 1992. "Informational Approaches to Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026213277x, December.
    3. Shimshack, Jay P. & Ward, Michael B., 2010. "Mercury advisories and household health trade-offs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 674-685, September.
    4. Jin, Lawrence & Kenkel, Don & Liu, Feng & Wang, Hua, 2015. "Retrospective and Prospective Benefit-Cost Analyses of U.S. Anti-Smoking Policies 1," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 154-186, April.
    5. Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Hammitt, James K., 2014. "The welfare value of FDA's mercury-in-fish advisory: A dynamic reanalysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 113-122.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lin, Dajun & Lutter, Randall & Ruhm, Christopher J., 2018. "Cognitive performance and labour market outcomes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 121-135.
    2. Helen G. Levy & Edward C. Norton & Jeffrey A. Smith, 2018. "Tobacco Regulation and Cost-Benefit Analysis: How Should We Value Foregone Consumer Surplus?," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-25, Winter.
    3. Hunt Allcott & Judd B. Kessler, 2015. "The Welfare Effects of Nudges: A Case Study of Energy Use Social Comparisons," NBER Working Papers 21671, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Philip DeCicca & Donald Kenkel & Feng Liu & Hua Wang, 2017. "Behavioral Welfare Economics and FDA Tobacco Regulations," Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, in: Human Capital and Health Behavior, volume 25, pages 143-179, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    5. Sophie Massin & Maxence Miéra, 2020. "Measuring consumer surplus in the case of addiction: A re-examination of the rational benchmark algebra," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 3171-3181.
    6. Hunt Allcott & Charlie Rafkin, 2020. "Optimal Regulation of E-cigarettes: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 27000, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Colmer, Jonathan & Lin, Dajun & Liu, Siying & Shimshack, Jay, 2021. "Why are pollution damages lower in developed countries? Insights from high-Income, high-particulate matter Hong Kong," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. Louie Rivers & Tamara Dempsey & Jade Mitchell & Carole Gibbs, 2015. "Environmental Regulation and Enforcement: Structures, Processes and the Use of Data for Fraud Detection," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1-29, December.
    9. Donald S. Kenkel & Sida Peng & Michael F. Pesko & Hua Wang, 2020. "Mostly harmless regulation? Electronic cigarettes, public policy, and consumer welfare," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(11), pages 1364-1377, November.
    10. Trinidad Beleche & Nellie Lew & Rosemarie L. Summers & J. Laron Kirby, 2018. "Are Graphic Warning Labels Stopping Millions of Smokers? A Comment on Huang, Chaloupka, and Fong," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 15(2), pages 129–157-1, May.
    11. Amnon Levy, 2011. "Physiological, Gastronomic and Budgetary Aspects and the Diets of Perfectly and Imperfectly Lifetime-Rational Consumers," Economics Working Papers wp11-13, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    12. Guerrero Santiago, 2012. "Who is Selling You Chiquilitros of Gasoline? Evidence From a Public Disclosure Policy," Working Papers 2012-04, Banco de México.
    13. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    14. Chen, Victor L. & Delmas, Magali A. & Locke, Stephen L. & Singh, Amarjeet, 2017. "Information strategies for energy conservation: A field experiment in India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 215-227.
    15. Anthony Ogus, 1998. "Regulatory Appraisal: A Neglected Opportunity for Law and Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 53-68, July.
    16. Alison L. Sexton Ward & Timothy K. M. Beatty, 2016. "Who Responds to Air Quality Alerts?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(2), pages 487-511, October.
    17. Joshua Graff Zivin & Matthew Neidell, 2013. "Environment, Health, and Human Capital," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(3), pages 689-730, September.
    18. Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Hammitt, James K., 2011. "Risk-Risk Tradeoffs in Fish Consumption: Can You Have the Cake and Eat It Too?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114813, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Christoph M. Rheinberger & James K. Hammitt, 2018. "Dinner with Bayes: On the revision of risk beliefs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 253-280, December.
    20. Anna Alberini, 2017. "Measuring the economic value of the effects of chemicals on ecological systems and human health," OECD Environment Working Papers 116, OECD Publishing.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ecl:harjfk:16-033. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ksharus.html .

    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.