IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-99-47.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mortality Risk Valuation for Environmental Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Krupnick, Alan

    () (Resources for the Future)

  • Cropper, Maureen
  • Alberini, Anna
  • Simon, Nathalie
  • Itaoka, Kenshi
  • Akai, Makoto

Abstract

Most benefit-cost analyses of reductions in air pollutants and other pollutants carrying mortality risks rely on estimates of the value of reductions in such risks produced by compensating wage studies, or contingent valuation studies that value risk reductions in the context of transport or job-related accidents. As the authors argue below, these estimates are inappropriate when valuing risk changes produced by environmental programs. The objectives of this paper are to explain why these estimates are inappropriate and to describe an improved approach to valuing reductions in risk of death from environmental programs, especially programs to reduce air pollution. The authors have implemented this approach in a pilot study in Tokyo, Japan. The paper provides estimates of the value of a statistical life based on the pilot study and describes extensions of the approach based on test results. The preliminary results from the Tokyo pilot indicate that individuals are able to distinguish between different magnitudes of small changes in mortality risks and between the same change in these risks occurring at different times (although the latter has not yet been subjected to an external scope test). Changes to the survey and a big increase in sample size may improve performance on the internal validity tests and the results of the scope tests. Although the current results can only be considered suggestive, if they were to remain after administration of the survey to a larger sample, and subject to some other caveats, they would imply that the VSL's currently used in benefit-cost analyses of environmental policies are significant overestimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Krupnick, Alan & Cropper, Maureen & Alberini, Anna & Simon, Nathalie & Itaoka, Kenshi & Akai, Makoto, 1999. "Mortality Risk Valuation for Environmental Policy," Discussion Papers dp-99-47, Resources For the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-99-47
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-99-47.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moore, Michael J & Viscusi, W Kip, 1988. "The Quantity-Adjusted Value of Life," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(3), pages 369-388, July.
    2. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1985. "Expectations, Life Expectancy, and Economic Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 100(2), pages 389-408.
    3. Cropper, Maureen L & Sussman, Frances G, 1988. "Families and the Economics of Risks to Life," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 255-260, March.
    4. Smith, V Kerry & Desvousges, William H, 1987. "An Empirical Analysis of the Economic Value of Risk Changes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 89-114, February.
    5. Cropper, Maureen L & Aydede, Sema K & Portney, Paul R, 1994. "Preferences for Life Saving Programs: How the Public Discounts Time and Age," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 243-265, May.
    6. Jones-Lee, M W & Hammerton, M & Philips, P R, 1985. "The Value of Safety: Results of a National Sample Survey," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(377), pages 49-72, March.
    7. Johannesson, Magnus & Johansson, Per-Olov, 1996. "To Be, or Not to Be, That Is the Question: An Empirical Study of the WTP for an Increased Life Expectancy at an Advanced Age," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 163-174, September.
    8. Cropper, Maureen L. & G. Sussman, Frances, 1990. "Valuing future risks to life," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 160-174, September.
    9. Maureen Cropper, 1999. "Valuing Environmental Benefits," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1409.
    10. Jones-Lee, M W, 1991. "Altruism and the Value of Other People's Safety," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 213-219, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ami, Dominique & Aprahamian, Frédéric & Chanel, Olivier & Joulé, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane, 2014. "Willingness to pay of committed citizens: A field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 31-39.
    2. Olivier Chanel & Pascale Scapecchi & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "How to correctly assess mortality benefits in public policies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 759-776.
    3. Dominika Parry Dziegielewska & Robert Mendelsohn, 2005. "Valuing Air Quality in Poland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(2), pages 131-163, February.
    4. 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.
    5. André de Palma & Néjia Zaouali, 2007. "Monétarisation des externalités de transport : un état de l'art," THEMA Working Papers 2007-08, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    6. Henrik Hammar & Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2004. "The value of risk-free cigarettes - do smokers underestimate the risk?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(1), pages 59-71.
    7. 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.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-99-47. 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: (Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/degraus.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.