Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 203–215 | Cite as

Welfare measurement and the health environment

  • Thomas Aronsson
  • Per-Olov Johansson
  • Karl-Gustaf Löfgren
Article

Abstract

An important issue in environmental economics is to augment the conventional net national product measure so as to cover changes in stocks of natural resources. In this paper, we show how to treat health (capital) effects in welfare measures caused by, for example, pollution. We also show the effects the risk of “doomsday” caused by pollution has on these measures. A Ramsey growth model enlarged with health capital and death risks is used to derive an augmented welfare measure. A way of solving the particular technical problem one faces when the death risk depends on a state variable (health capital) is also presented. This measure is contrasted with the conventional net national product measure. We also briefly discuss the welfare properties of a market economy when individuals invest in health capital but face a strictly positive death risk.

Keywords

Evaluation of national product health environment 

Subject classification

JEL C82 131 Q28 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    T. Aronsson and K.-G. Löfgren, National product related welfare measures in the presence of technological change, externalities and uncertainty, Env. Resource Econ. (1995), to appear.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    T. Aronsson and K.-G. Löfgren, Welfare consequences of technological and environmental externalities in the Ramsey growth model, Natural Resource Modeling 7(1993)1–14.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    O.J. Blanchard, Debt, deficits, and finite horizons, J. Political Econ. 93(1985)223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    O.J. Blanchard and S. Fischer,Lectures on Macroeconimics (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    P.S. Dasgupta and M. Heal,Economic Theory and Exhaustible Resources (Cambridge University Press, Oxford, 1979).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    P.S. Dasgupta and K.G. Mäler,The Environment and Emerging Developing Issues (Wider, Helsinki, 1990), Beijer Institute Reprint Series No. 1 (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 1991).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Grossman,The Demand for Health: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation, NBER Occasional Paper 119 (National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, 1972).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J.M. Hartwick, Natural resources, national accounting, and economic depreciation, J. Public Econ. 43(1990)291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.M. Hartwick, Degradation of environmental capital and national accounting procedures, Euro. Econ. Rev. 35(1991)642–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. Lucas, On the mechanics of industrial development, J. Monetary Econ. 22(1988)3–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    K.G. Mäler, National accounts and environmental resources, Env. Resource Econ. 1(1991)1–15.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    P. Romer, Increasing returns and long-run growth, J. Political Econ. 94(1986)1002–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    G. Saint-Paul, Fiscal policy in an endogenous growth model, Quart. J. Econ. 107(1992) 1243–1259.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    A. Seierstad and K. Sydsaeter,Optimal Control Theory with Economic Applications (North-Holland, New York, 1987).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    R.M. Solow, On the intergenerational allocation of natural resources, Scand. J. Econ. 88(1986)141–149.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    M. Weitzman, On the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy, Quart. J. Econ. 90(1976)156–162.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J.C. Baltzer AG, Science Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Aronsson
    • 1
  • Per-Olov Johansson
    • 2
  • Karl-Gustaf Löfgren
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of UmeåUmeåSweden
  2. 2.Stockholm School of EconomicsStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations