Evidence is presented to show that people are willing to pay a premium to avoid "bad deaths"--deaths that are especially dreaded, uncontrollable, involuntarily incurred, and inequitably distributed. Public judgments of this kind help explain the demand for regulation. But some of these judgments do not justify current policies, because they stem from selective attention and confusion. Few causes of death are entirely uncontrollable or faced wholly involuntarily; the issue is not whether they can be controlled but at what cost. But three kinds of "bad deaths" deserve special attention: those imposing high externalities, those preceded by unusual pain and suffering, and those producing distributional inequity. Copyright 1997 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 14 (1997)
Issue (Month): 3 (May-June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/journal/11166/PS2|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jrisku:v:14:y:1997:i:3:p:259-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.