IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/renvpo/v1y2007i2p261-282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mortality-risk Valuation and Age: Stated Preference Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Alan Krupnick

Abstract

Controversy over the value of statistical life (VSL) centers on whether a single value should be applied to all age groups, as currently done by US government agencies, or whether lower values should be used for the elderly, recognizing that their life expectancies are shorter than those of younger people. Surveys of different age groups' willingness to pay (WTP) for mortality-risk reductions can potentially help resolve this issue.This paper reports on an analysis of this survey literature. Of some 36 studies reviewed, the literature is split on whether older people have a lower WTP for mortality-risk reductions. Even among the studies that find such a discount, its size varies widely. A simple statistical analysis of this literature reveals that larger samples and samples with a higher fraction of older people are significantly associated with finding this effect, suggesting that conducting a larger, more thorough study may help resolve this issue. The paper also raises the possibility that the WTP estimated when all factors related to age are allowed to vary may be more useful to policy than the WTP estimated when all such factors are held constant. A clear finding is that there is no evidence to support use of a uniform value of statistical life year. Copyright 2007, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan Krupnick, 2007. "Mortality-risk Valuation and Age: Stated Preference Evidence," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 1(2), pages 261-282, Summer.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:renvpo:v:1:y:2007:i:2:p:261-282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reep/rem016
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:renvpo:v:1:y:2007:i:2:p:261-282. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aereeea.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.