IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1984748808-812_0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to pay for reduction in fatality risk: An exploratory survey

Author

Listed:
  • Muller, A.
  • Reutzel, T.J.

Abstract

Willingness to pay surveys represent one method for measuring the benefit of health and life saving programs. However, the reliability and validity of survey responses to questions concerning the reduction of fatality or injury risks have been questioned. The results of a survey of 77 senior year undergraduate students show that reasonable appearing and consistent responses to willingness to pay questions on car crash protection can be obtained. However, the implied value of life was over 100 times greater for an unidentified life than for the respondent's own life. Also, no relationship was found between willingness to pay responses and variables reflecting respondent's rational considerations. These paradoxical results seem to be due to the mistaken assumptions that people employ rational considerations when responding to willingness to pay questions and that they are capable of matching their responses with the functional relationship (proportionality) underlying implied value of life calculations.

Suggested Citation

  • Muller, A. & Reutzel, T.J., 1984. "Willingness to pay for reduction in fatality risk: An exploratory survey," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 74(8), pages 808-812.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1984:74:8:808-812_0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Hammerschmidt & Hans‐Peter Zeitler & Reiner Leidl, 2004. "A utility‐theoretic approach to the aggregation of willingness to pay measured in decomposed scenarios: development and empirical test," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 345-361, April.
    2. Guofang Zhai & Takeshi Suzuki, 2008. "Effects of Risk Representation and Scope on Willingness to Pay for Reduced Risks: Evidence from Tokyo Bay, Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 513-522, April.
    3. Klose, Thomas, 1999. "The contingent valuation method in health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 97-123, May.
    4. Arianne de Blaeij & Raymond J.G.M. Florax & Piet Rietveld & Erik T. Verhoef, 2000. "The Value of Statistical Life in Road Safety: A Meta-Analysis," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-089/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. John M. Mendeloff & Robert M. Kaplan, 1989. "Are Large Differences in “Lifesaving” Costs Justified? A Psychometric Study of the Relative Value Placed on Preventing Deaths," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 349-363, September.
    6. Thijs Dekker & Roy Brouwer & Marjan Hofkes & Klaus Moeltner, 2011. "The Effect of Risk Context on the Value of a Statistical Life: a Bayesian Meta-model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(4), pages 597-624, August.
    7. Tsu‐Tan Fu & Jin‐Tan Liu & James K. Hammitt, 1999. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Low‐Pesticide Fresh Produce in Taiwan," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 220-233, May.

    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:aph:ajpbhl:1984:74:8:808-812_0. 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    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.