IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Value of Reducing Cancer Risks at Contaminated Sites: Are More Heavily Exposed People Willing to Pay More?

  • Anna Alberini

    (University of Maryland)

  • Stefania Tonin

    (University IUAV)

  • Margherita Turvani

    (University IUAV)

We use conjoint choice questions to investigate people’s tastes for cancer risk reductions and income in the context of public programs that would provide for remediation at abandoned industrial contaminated sites. Our survey was self-administered using the computer by persons living in the vicinity of an important contaminated site on the Italian National Priority List. The value of a prevented case of cancer is €2.6 million, but this figure does vary with income, perceived exposure to contaminants, and opinions about priorities that should be pursued by cleanup programs.

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.

File URL: http://www.feem.it/userfiles/attach/Publication/NDL2009/NDL2009-060.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei in its series Working Papers with number 2009.60.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Jul 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2009.60
Contact details of provider: Postal: Corso Magenta, 63 - 20123 Milan
Phone: 0039-2-52036934
Fax: 0039-2-52036946
Web page: http://www.feem.it/Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Jin-Tan Liu & James K. Hammitt, 2003. "Effects of Disease Type and Latency on the Value of Mortality Risk," NBER Working Papers 10012, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Swait, Joffre & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 1999. "Choice Environment, Market Complexity and Consumer Behavior: A Theoretical and Empirical Approach for Incorporating Decision Complexity into Models of Consumer Choice," Staff Paper Series 24093, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
  3. Anna Alberini & Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani & Aline Chiabai, 2006. "Paying for Permanence: Public Preferences for Contaminated Site Cleanup," Working Papers 2006.113, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  4. Lucas W. Davis, 2004. "The Effect of Health Risk on Housing Values: Evidence from a Cancer Cluster," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1693-1704, December.
  5. Krupnick, Alan, et al, 2002. " Age, Health and the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions: A Contingent Valuation Survey of Ontario Residents," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 161-86, March.
  6. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. " Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-62, July.
  7. Bartik, Timothy J., 1988. "Evaluating the benefits of non-marginal reductions in pollution using information on defensive expenditures," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 111-127, March.
  8. Shogren, Jason F. & Crocker, Thomas D., 1991. "Risk, Self-Protection, and Ex Ante Economic Value," Staff General Research Papers 334, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  9. Wesley A. Magat & W. Kip Viscusi & Joel Huber, 1996. "A Reference Lottery Metric for Valuing Health," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(8), pages 1118-1130, August.
  10. Krupnick, Alan & Alberini, Anna & Simon, Nathalie & Cooper, Maureen, 2004. "Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions: Does Latency Matter?," Discussion Papers dp-04-13, Resources For the Future.
  11. Hensher, David A. & Rose, John M., 2007. "Development of commuter and non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public transport infrastructure projects: A case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 428-443, June.
  12. repec:reg:rpubli:134 is not listed on IDEAS
  13. Spash, Clive L., 2007. "Deliberative monetary valuation (DMV): Issues in combining economic and political processes to value environmental change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 690-699, September.
  14. Guy Garrod & Ken Willis, 1998. "Using Contingent Ranking to Estimate the Loss of Amenity Value for Inland Waterways from Public Utility Service Structures," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(2), pages 241-247, September.
  15. Pratt, John W & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1996. "Willingness to Pay and the Distribution of Risk and Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 747-63, August.
  16. Anna Alberini & Dennis Guignet, 2008. "Voluntary Cleanups and Redevelopment Potential: Lessons from Baltimore, Maryland," Working Papers 2008.87, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  17. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai, 2005. "Urban Environmental Health and Sensitive Populations: How Much are the Italians Willing to Pay to Reduce Their Risks?," Working Papers 2005.105, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  18. Riccardo Scarpa & John M. Rose, 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), pages 253-282, 09.
  19. Ted Gayer & James T. Hamilton & W. Kip Viscusi, 2000. "Private Values Of Risk Tradeoffs At Superfund Sites: Housing Market Evidence On Learning About Risk," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(3), pages 439-451, August.
  20. John Weicher, 1996. "The Distribution of Wealth," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 650823, August.
  21. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
  22. 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.
  23. Susan Chilton & Michael Jones-Lee & Francis Kiraly & Hugh Metcalf & Wei Pang, 2006. "Dread risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 165-182, December.
  24. Takahiro Tsuge & Atsuo Kishimoto & Kenji Takeuchi, 2005. "A Choice Experiment Approach to the Valuation of Mortality," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 73-95, July.
  25. Maddison, David & Bigano, Andrea, 2003. "The amenity value of the Italian climate," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 319-332, March.
  26. Viscusi, W Kip, 1993. "The Value of Risks to Life and Health," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1912-46, December.
  27. Corso, Phaedra S & Hammitt, James K & Graham, John D, 2001. " Valuing Mortality-Risk Reduction: Using Visual Aids to Improve the Validity of Contingent Valuation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 165-84, September.
  28. Dietrich Earnhart, 2001. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods to Value Environmental Amenities at Residential Locations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 12-29.
  29. James T. Hamilton & W. Kip Viscusi, 1999. "Are Risk Regulators Rational? Evidence from Hazardous Waste Cleanup Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1010-1027, September.
  30. Colombo, Sergio & Calatrava-Requena, Javier & Hanley, Nick, 2006. "Analysing the social benefits of soil conservation measures using stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 850-861, July.
  31. Thomas P. Holmes & Kevin J. Boyle, 2005. "Dynamic Learning and Context-Dependence in Sequential, Attribute-Based, Stated-Preference Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(1).
  32. Riccardo Scarpa & Kenneth G. Willis & Melinda Acutt, 2007. "Valuing externalities from water supply: Status quo, choice complexity and individual random effects in panel kernel logit analysis of choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(4), pages 449-466.
  33. Ted Gayer & James T. Hamilton & W. Kip Viscusi, 2002. "The Market Value of Reducing Cancer Risk: Hedonic Housing Prices with Changing Information," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 266-289, October.
  34. Cropper, Maureen L. & William N. Evans & Stephen J. Berard & Maria M. Ducla-Soares & Paul R. Portney, 1992. "The Determinants of Pesticide Regulation: A Statistical Analysis of EPA Decision Making," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(1), pages 175-97, February.
  35. Sudip Chattopadhyay & John B. Braden & Arianto Patunru, 2005. "Benefits Of Hazardous Waste Cleanup: New Evidence From Survey- And Market-Based Property Value Approaches," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(3), pages 357-375, 07.
  36. Bateman, Ian J. & Burgess, Diane & Hutchinson, W. George & Matthews, David I., 2008. "Learning design contingent valuation (LDCV): NOAA guidelines, preference learning and coherent arbitrariness," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 127-141, March.
  37. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Gary Koop, 2002. "Modelling Recreation Demand Using Choice Experiments: Climbing in Scotland," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(3), pages 449-466, July.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2009.60. 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: (barbara racah)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.