Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

, Volume 51, Issue 1, pp 53–77 | Cite as

The value of a statistical life for transportation regulations: A test of the benefits transfer methodology

Article

Abstract

Policy applications of the value of a statistical life (VSL) often make a benefits transfer assumption that the VSL from one market context is broadly applicable to other contexts. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s estimate of $9.2 million is based on labor market estimates of VSL. This article examines whether there are any significant differences in labor market estimates of the VSL by the nature of the fatality, utilizing two different approaches that distinguish between fatalities resulting from transportation events and vehicle-related sources based on the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) data. The labor market estimates of VSL generalize across transport and non-transport contexts so that it is appropriate to use labor market estimates of VSL to value the benefits of transport regulations. This result holds even after accounting for the level and composition of nonfatal job injuries.

Keywords

Value of a statistical life VSL Benefits transfer CFOI Transportation Fatality Injury 

JEL Classifications

I18 J17 J30 

References

  1. Ackerman, F., & Heinzerling, L. (2005). Priceless: On knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, M. D., & Posner, E. A. (2000). Implementing cost-benefit analysis when preferences are distorted. In Cost-benefit analysis: Legal, economic and philosophical perspectives (pp. 269–311). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aldy, J. E., & Viscusi, W. K. (2007). Age differences in the value of statistical life: Revealed preference evidence. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 1(2), 241–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldy, J. E., & Viscusi, W. K. (2008). Adjusting the value of a statistical life for age and cohort effects. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(3), 573–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beattie, J., Covey, J., Dolan, P., Hopkins, L., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Pidgeon, N., Robinson, A., & Spencer, A. (1998). On the contingent valuation of safety and the safety of contingent valuation: Part 1—Caveat investigator. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 17(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breyer, S. G. (1993). Breaking the vicious circle: Towards effective risk regulation. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Carthy, T., Chilton, S., Covey, J., Hopkins, L., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Pidgeon, N., & Spencer, A. (1998). On the contingent valuation of safety and the safety of contingent valuation: Part 2—The CV/SG “chained” approach. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 17(3), 187–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chilton, S., Kiraly, F., Metcalf, H., & Pang, W. (2006). Dread risks. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 33(3), 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Covey, J., Robinson, A., Jones-Lee, M., & Loomes, G. (2010). Responsibility, scale, and the valuation of rail safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 40(1), 85–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dionne, G., & Lanoie, P. (2004). Public choice about the value of a statistical life for cost-benefit analyses: The case of road safety. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 38(2), 247–274.Google Scholar
  11. Evans, M. F., & Schaur, G. (2010). A quantile estimation approach to identify income and age variation in the value of a statistical life. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 59(3), 260–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans, M. F., & Smith, V. K. (2006). Do we really understand the age–VSL relationship? Resource and Energy Economics, 28(3), 242–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans, M. F., & Smith, V. K. (2008). Complementarity and the measurement of individual risk tradeoffs: Accounting for quantity and quality of life effects. Environmental and Resource Economics, 41(3), 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodman, L. A. (1960). On the exact variance of products. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 55(292), 708–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heinzerling, L. (2000). The rights of statistical people. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 24, 189–207.Google Scholar
  16. Hersch, J., & Viscusi, W. K. (2010). Immigrant status and the value of statistical life. Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 749–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. H. M. S. Treasury. (2011). The green book: Appraisal and evaluation in central government. London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
  18. Jones-Lee, M. W. (1989). The economics of safety and physical risk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  19. Jones-Lee, M. W., & Loomes, G. (1995). Scale and context effects in the valuation of transport safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 11, 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones-Lee, M. W., Hammerton, M., & Philips, P. R. (1985). The value of safety: Results of a national sample survey. The Economic Journal, 95, 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kniesner, T. J., & Viscusi, W. K. (2005). Value of a statistical life: Relative position vs. relative age. American Economic Review, 95(2), 142–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kniesner, T. J., Viscusi, W. K., & Ziliak, J. P. (2006). Life-cycle consumption and the age-adjusted value of life. Contributions in Economic Analysis & Policy, 5(1), Article 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kniesner, T. J., Viscusi, W. K., & Ziliak, J. P. (2010). Policy relevant heterogeneity in the value of statistical life: New evidence from panel data quantile regressions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 40(1), 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kniesner, T. J., Viscusi, W. K., Woock, C., & Ziliak, J. P. (2012). The value of a statistical life: Evidence from panel data. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(1), 74–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kochi, I., & Taylor, L. O. (2011). Risk heterogeneity and the value of reducing fatal risks: Further market-based evidence. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 2(3), Art. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Leeth, J. D., & Ruser, J. (2003). Compensating wage differentials for fatal and nonfatal injury risk by gender and race. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27(3), 257–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lindhjem, H., Navrud, S., Braathen, N. A., & Biausque, V. (2011). Valuing mortality risk reductions from environmental, transport, and health policies: A global meta-analysis of stated preference studies. Risk Analysis, 31(9), 1381–1407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Northwood, J. (2010). Change to hours-based fatality rates in the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries. Monthly Labor Review, January 25, 2010. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.Google Scholar
  29. Posner, E. A., & Sunstein, C. R. (2005). Dollars and death. University of Chicago Law Review, 72, 537–598.Google Scholar
  30. Rowell, A. (2012). Partial valuation in cost-benefit analysis. Administrative Law Review, 64, 723–742.Google Scholar
  31. Scotton, C. R., & Taylor, L. O. (2011). Valuing risk reductions: Incorporating risk heterogeneity into a revealed preference framework. Resource and Energy Economics, 33(2), 381–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sunstein, C. R. (1997). Bad deaths. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14(3), 259–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. U.S. Department of Labor. (2006). Nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses requiring days away from work. Available at http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/case/osnr0029.pdf.
  34. U.S. Department of Labor. (2007a). Fatal occupational injuries, annual average hours worked, total employment, and rates of fatal occupational injuries by selected worker characteristics, occupations, and industries, 2007. Available at www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2007h.pdf.
  35. U.S. Department of Labor. (2007b). Occupational injury and illness classification manual. Available at http://www.bls.gov/iif/oiics_manual_2007.pdf.
  36. U.S. Department of Transportation. (2013). Revised departmental guidance 2013: Treatment of the value of preventing fatalities and injuries in preparing economic analysis. Available at http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/VSL%20Guidance%202013.pdf.
  37. U.S. Department of Transportation. (2014). Revised departmental guidance 2014: Treatment of the value of preventing fatalities and injuries in preparing economic analysis. Available at http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/VSL_Guidance_2014.pdf.
  38. U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-4. (2003). The White House, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/Circulars_a004_a-4.
  39. Viscusi, W. K. (1993). The value of risks to life and health. Journal of Economic Literature, 31(4), 1912–1946.Google Scholar
  40. Viscusi, W. K. (2003). Racial differences in labor market values of a statistical life. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27(3), 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Viscusi, W. K. (2004). The value of life: Estimates with risks by occupation and industry. Economic Inquiry, 42(1), 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Viscusi, W. K. (2009). The devaluation of life. Regulation & Governance, 3(2), 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Viscusi, W. K. (2013). Using data from the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries to estimate the “value of a statistical life.” Monthly Labor Review, October 31, 2013.Google Scholar
  44. Viscusi, W. K. (2014). The value of individual and societal risks to life and health. In M. J. Machina & W. K. Viscusi (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of risk and uncertainty (pp. 385–452). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  45. 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
  46. Viscusi, W. K., & Hersch, J. (2008). The mortality cost to smokers. Journal of Health Economics, 27(4), 943–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. White, K. H., & Neeley, J. (2013). Who regulates the regulator? Cost-effectiveness analysis in Texas state agency rulemaking. Texas Tech Administrative Law Journal, 14, 401–420.Google Scholar
  48. Wooldridge, J. M. (2003). Cluster-sample methods in applied econometrics. The American Economic Review, 93(2), 133–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations