Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

, Volume 39, Issue 1, pp 65–85 | Cite as

Precautionary behavior and willingness to pay for a mortality risk reduction: Searching for the expected relationship

Article
First Online:

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Value of a statistical life Stated preference Risk behavior 

JEL

D6 D8 I1 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

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.

References

  1. Andersson, H. (2005). The value of safety as revealed in the Swedish car market: an application of the hedonic pricing approach. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30(3), 211–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, S. E., & Halvorsen, R. (1990). The valuation of risks to life: Evidence from the market for automobiles. Review of Economics and Statistics, 72(1), 133–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Attewell, R. G., Glase, K., & McFadden, M. (2001). Bicycle helmet efficacy: a metaanalysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 33, 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balistreri, E., McClelland, G., Poe, G. L., & Schulze, W. D. (2001). Can hypothetical questions reveal true values? A laboratory comparison of dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent values with auction values. Environmental and Resource Economics, 18, 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blomquist, G. C. (1979). Value of life saving: Implications from consumption activity. Journal of Political Economy, 87, 540–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomquist, G. C. (2004). Self-protection and averting behavior, values of statistical lives, and benefit cost analysis of environmental policy. Review of Economics of the Household, 2, 89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(3), 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cedersund, H. -Å. (2006). Bilbältesanvändningen i Sverige 2005. VTI notat 18-2006.Google Scholar
  10. Cummings, P., Wells, J. D., & Rivara, F. P. (2003). Estimating seat belt effectiveness using matched-pair cohort methods. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 35, 143–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dardis, R. (1980). The value of life: New evidence from the market place. American Economic Review, 70, 1077–1082.Google Scholar
  12. de Blaeij, A., Florax, R. J. G. M., Rietvald, P., & Verhoef, E. (2003). The value of statistical life in road safety: a meta-analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 35(6), 973–986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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
  14. Evans, M. F., & Smith, V. K. (2006). Do we really understand the age-VSL relationship? Resource and Energy Economics, 28, 242–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gayer, T., Hamilton, J. T., & Viscusi, W. K. (2002). The market value of reducing cancer risk: Hedonic housing prices with changing information. Southern Economic Journal, 69, 266–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. Hultkrantz, L., Lindberg, G., & Andersson, C. (2006). The value of improved road safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 32(2), 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jenkins, R., Owens, N., & Wiggins, L. B. (2001). Valuing reduced risks to children: the case of bicycle safety helmets. Contemporary Economic Policy, 19(4), 397–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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
  21. Krupnick, A., Alberini, A., Cropper, M., Simon, N., O’Brien, B., Goeree, R., 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, 24(2), 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lanoie, P., Pedro, C., & Latour, R. (1995). The value of a statistical life: a comparison of two approaches. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 10, 235–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Murphy, J., Allen, G. P., Stevens, T. H., & Weatherhead, D. (2005). A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 30(3), 313–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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
  25. Powe, N. A., & Bateman, I. (2004). Investigating insensitivity to scope: a split-sample test of perceived scheme realism. Land Economics, 80(2), 258–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Revkeldt, M. G. C., & Labibes, K. (2003). Literature survey on in-vehicle safety devices. TNO Report.Google Scholar
  27. Rodgers, G. (1996). Bicyclist risks and helmet usage patterns: an analysis of compensatory behavior in a risky recreational acitivity. Managerial and Decision Economics, 17, 493–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shepard, D. S., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (1984). Survival versus consumption. Management Science, 30(4), 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. SIKA. (2005). Vägtrafikskador.Google Scholar
  30. SIKA. (2008). Samhällsekonomiska principer och kalkylvärden för transportsektorn: ASEK 4. SIKA PM 2008:3.Google Scholar
  31. Svenska-cykelsällskapet. (1998). Cykeln och rekreationen. Nationella cykelprogrammet.Google Scholar
  32. Viscusi, W. K. (1979). Employment hazards: An investigation of market performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Viscusi, W. K. (1998). Rational risk policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Viscusi, W. K., & Aldy, J. E. (2003). The value of a statistical life: a critical review of market estimates throughout the world. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27(1), 5–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Viscusi, W. K., Magat, W. A., & Huber, J. (1991). Pricing environmental health risks: Survey assessments of risk-risk and risk-dollar trade-offs for chronic bronchitis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 21(1), 32–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vägverket. (2006). Vägverkets samhällsekonomiska kalkylvärden. Publication 2006:127.Google Scholar
  37. Örebro. (2007). En sammanställning: Statistisk om Örebro Kommun. http://www.orebro.se/download/18.9da23d811324ac594f80001050/Snabbstatistik2007.pdf.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Swedish Business SchoolÖrebro UniversityÖrebroSweden
  2. 2.Centre for Research on Child and Adolescent Mental HealthKarlstad UniversityKarlstadSweden

Personalised recommendations