Precautionary behavior and willingness to pay for a mortality risk reduction: Searching for the expected relationship
- 191 Downloads
This paper examines within-sample correlation between six different precautionary behaviors and stated willingness to pay for a mortality risk reduction. The paper also shows estimates of the value of a statistical life based on seat belt and bicycle helmet use as well as based on the stated willingness to pay for a risk reduction in traffic mortality. Contrary to the theoretical expectations, no correlation is found between precautionary behavior and stated willingness to pay. One major explanation is that females and the elderly take more precaution, but state a lower WTP for a risk reduction. The estimates of VSL from the different approaches are $11.0 million, $5.0 million and $2.8 million from stated WTP, bicycle helmet use and seat belt use, respectively.
KeywordsValue of a statistical life Stated preference Risk behavior
JELD6 D8 I1
I would like to thank an anonymous reviewer, Glenn Blomquist, Peter Martinsson, Magnus Johannesson, Krister Hjalte, Lars Hultkrantz and Björn Sund for valuable comments and support. Financial support from the Swedish Rescue Services Agency is gratefully acknowledged.
- Blomquist, G. C., Miller, T. R., & Levy, D. T. (1996). Values of risk reduction implied by motorist use of protection equipment: New evidence from different populations. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 30(1), 55–66.Google Scholar
- Cedersund, H. -Å. (2006). Bilbältesanvändningen i Sverige 2005. VTI notat 18-2006.Google Scholar
- Dardis, R. (1980). The value of life: New evidence from the market place. American Economic Review, 70, 1077–1082.Google Scholar
- Dissanayake, S., & Ratnayake, I. (2007). Estimation of seat belt effectiveness values using double pair comparison method based on state highway crash data. Advances in transportation studies: An international journal, 13, 67–76.Google Scholar
- Hakes, J. K., & Viscusi, W. K. (2007). Automobile seatbelt usage and the value of a statistical life. Southern Economic Journal, 73(3), 659–676.Google Scholar
- Harrison, G. W., & Rutström, E. E. (2005). Experimental evidence on the existence of hypothetical bias in value elicitation methods. In C. Plott & V. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics results. New York: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
- Jones-Lee, M. W., Loomes, G., & Phillips, P. R. (1995). Valuing the prevention of non-fatal road injuries: Contingent valuation vs. standard gamble. Oxford Economic Papers, 47, 676–695.Google Scholar
- Persson, U., & Cedervall, M. (1991). The value of risk reductions: Results of a Swedish sample survey. Lund University: The Swedish Institute for Health Economics.Google Scholar
- Revkeldt, M. G. C., & Labibes, K. (2003). Literature survey on in-vehicle safety devices. TNO Report.Google Scholar
- SIKA. (2005). Vägtrafikskador.Google Scholar
- SIKA. (2008). Samhällsekonomiska principer och kalkylvärden för transportsektorn: ASEK 4. SIKA PM 2008:3.Google Scholar
- Svenska-cykelsällskapet. (1998). Cykeln och rekreationen. Nationella cykelprogrammet.Google Scholar
- Viscusi, W. K. (1979). Employment hazards: An investigation of market performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Vägverket. (2006). Vägverkets samhällsekonomiska kalkylvärden. Publication 2006:127.Google Scholar
- Örebro. (2007). En sammanställning: Statistisk om Örebro Kommun. http://www.orebro.se/download/18.9da23d811324ac594f80001050/Snabbstatistik2007.pdf.