IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v31y2005i1p47-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A ‘Natural Experiment’ Approach to Contingent Valuation of Private and Public UV Health Risk Reduction Strategies in Low and High Risk Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Bateman
  • Roy Brouwer
  • Stavros Georgiou
  • Nick Hanley
  • Fernando Machado
  • Susana Mourato
  • Caroline Saunders

Abstract

We present the results of a ‘natural experiment’ to test how variations in exogenous risk levels affect resultant willingness to pay (WTP) for risk reduction. The case study presented considers WTP for reductions in the skin cancer risks associated with exposure to solar UV radiation. A common design contingent valuation survey is conducted in four countries, across which variation in geographical latitude and genetic mix mean that exogenous risks differ substantially. Survey respondents were presented with both a private and public good route for affecting risk reduction. In both cases, results confirm that once adjustment had been made for expected relationships with other covariates (such as income and risk averting behaviour), valuation responses for both goods conformed to expectations with the ordering of values across countries reflecting the ordering of scientifically established health risks. This suggests that links between values and objective health risks may be observed within such situations and provides a justification for continuing research into more natural representations of risk and risk reductions in order to yield consistent and robust measures of associated values. Copyright Springer 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Bateman & Roy Brouwer & Stavros Georgiou & Nick Hanley & Fernando Machado & Susana Mourato & Caroline Saunders, 2005. "A ‘Natural Experiment’ Approach to Contingent Valuation of Private and Public UV Health Risk Reduction Strategies in Low and High Risk Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(1), pages 47-72, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:31:y:2005:i:1:p:47-72
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-004-6978-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-004-6978-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-004-6978-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Carola Braun & Katrin Rehdanz & Ulrich Schmidt, 2016. "Validity of Willingness to Pay Measures under Preference Uncertainty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Torres, Cati & Faccioli, Michela & Riera Font, Antoni, 2017. "Waiting or acting now? The effect on willingness-to-pay of delivering inherent uncertainty information in choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 231-240.
    3. Kyriaki Remoundou & Phoebe Koundouri, 2009. "Environmental Effects on Public Health: An Economic Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 6(8), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Ana Bobinac & Job Exel & Frans Rutten & Werner Brouwer, 2014. "The Value of a QALY: Individual Willingness to Pay for Health Gains Under Risk," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 75-86, January.
    5. Cecilia Håkansson, 2008. "A new valuation question: analysis of and insights from interval open-ended data in contingent valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 175-188, February.
    6. Roy Brouwer & Marije Schaafsma, 2013. "Modelling risk adaptation and mitigation behaviour under different climate change scenarios," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 11-29, March.
    7. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Adachi, Kenji, 2011. "A framework for estimating willingness-to-pay to avoid endogenous environmental risks," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 130-154, January.
    8. Dennis Guignet & Anna Alberini, 2015. "Can Property Values Capture Changes in Environmental Health Risks? Evidence from a Stated Preference Study in Italy and the United Kingdom," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 501-517, March.
    9. Mariah D. Ehmke & Jayson L. Lusk & John A. List, 2008. "Is Hypothetical Bias a Universal Phenomenon? A Multinational Investigation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(3), pages 489-500.
    10. Mehmet Kutluay & Roy Brouwer & Haripriya Gundimeda & Nitin Lokhande & Richard S. J. Tol, 2017. "Public preferences and valuation of new malaria risk," Working Paper Series 1917, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. Brandt, Sylvia J & Vasquez Lavin, Felipe & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2008. "Designing contingent valuation scenarios for environmental health: The case of childhood asthma," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4ht2k0ch, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    12. Brandt, Sylvia J. & Lavin, Felipe Vasquez & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2008. "Designing contingent valuation scenarios for environmental health: The case of childhood asthma," CUDARE Working Papers 47077, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

    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:kap:enreec:v:31:y:2005:i:1:p:47-72. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.