Eliciting Measures of Value for Health and Safety

Many transport policies and innovations are liable to have implications for human health and safety. How should such implications be weighed against the other costs and benefits? In particular, when policy makers are undertaking social cost-benefit analysis, what monetary value should be attached to any health or safety components? Standard welfare economics suggests that the answer should reflect people's collective willingness-to-pay (WTP) for any such improvement (or their willingness-to-accept (WTA) compensation for any deterioration). But eliciting such values from the general population presents a number of practical challenges. This talk will describe some of the problems encountered in the course of several large studies conducted during the past 10 years, and consider what we have learned about the nature of people's preferences and the possible implications for public policy in this area. Much of that work has had a transport focus, but the issues raised are relevant to a number of other areas, including environmental health, crime, safety at work and in the home, and the allocation of health care resources.

[1]  M. Jones-Lee,et al.  Valuation of Health Benefits Associated with Reductions in Air Pollution , 2004 .

[2]  Graham Loomes,et al.  VALUING THE PREVENTION OF NON-FATAL ROAD INJURIES: CONTINGENT VALUATION VS. STANDARD GAMBLES , 1995 .

[3]  G. Loomes,et al.  Imprecise Preferences and Survey Design in Contingent Valuation , 1997 .

[4]  Jonathan Baron,et al.  Determinants of insensitivity to quantity in valuation of public goods: Contribution, warm glow, budget constraints, availability, and prominence , 1996 .

[5]  Graham Loomes,et al.  Risk–risk versus standard gamble procedures for measuring health state utilities , 1995 .

[6]  Joel Huber,et al.  Pricing environmental health risks: survey assessments of risk-risk and risk-dollar trade-offs for chronic bronchitis☆ , 1991 .

[7]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Contingent Valuation Surveys and Tests of Insensitivity to Scope , 1995 .

[8]  Graham Loomes,et al.  Public Perceptions of Risk and Preference-Based Values of Safety , 2002 .

[9]  N. Pidgeon,et al.  On the Contingent Valuation of Safety and the Safety of Contingent Valuation: Part 1-Caveat Investigator , 1998 .

[10]  C. Sunstein,et al.  Bad Deaths , 1997 .

[11]  Robert Sugden,et al.  Alternatives to the Neo‐Classical Theory of Choice , 2001 .

[12]  W. Dubourg,et al.  Imprecise preferences and the WTP-WTA disparity , 1994 .

[13]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction , 1992 .

[14]  E. Nord The Person-trade-off Approach to Valuing Health Care Programs , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  Angela Robinson,et al.  Why Did Two Theoretically Equivalent Methods Produce Two Very Different Values , 1995 .

[16]  Graham Loomes,et al.  The Willingness to Accept Value of Statistical Life Relative to the Willingness to Pay Value: Evidence and Policy Implications , 2005 .

[17]  N. Pidgeon,et al.  On the Contingent Valuation of Safety and the Safety of Contingent Valuation: Part 2 - The CV/SG "Chained" Approach , 1998 .