Abstract
Using a contingent valuation survey, people's willingness to pay for a given risk reduction is found to be much larger, consistently more than two times as large, when traveling by air compared to by taxi. Follow-up questions revealed that an important reason for this discrepancy is that many experience a higher mental suffering from flying, and that they are willing to pay to reduce this suffering. It was also consistently found that people are willing to pay more for a certain risk reduction if the original price was higher. Policy implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andreoni, James. (1989). “Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence,” Journal of Political Economy 97, 1447-1458.
Andreoni, James. (1990). “Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm Glow Giving,” Economic Journal 100, 464-477.
Beattie, Jane et al. (1998). “On the Contingent Valuation of Safety and the Safety of Contingent Valuation: Part 1-Caveat Investigator,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17, 5-25.
Broome, John. (1999). Ethics our of Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carlsson, Fredrik and Olof Johansson-Stenman. (2000). “Willingness to Pay for Improved Air Quality in Sweden,” Applied Economics 32, 661-670.
Carson, Richard and Robert Mitchell. (1993). “The Value of Clean Water: The Public's Willingness to Pay for Boatable, Fishable, and Swimmable Quality Water,” Water Resources Research 29, 2445-2454.
Chapman Gretchen B. and Eric J. Johnson. (2002). “Incorporating the Irrelevant: Anchors in Judgments of Belief and Value.” In Gilovich, Thomas, Dale Griffin, and Daniel Kahneman (eds.), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Corso, Phaedra, James K. Hammitt, and John D. Graham. (2001). “Valuing Mortality-Risk Reduction: Using Visual Aids to Improve the Validity of Contingent Valuation,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 23, 165-184.
Diamond, Peter A. and Jerry A. Hausman. (1994). “Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better Than No Number?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 8, 45-64.
Federal Aviation Administration. (1996). Statistical Handbook of Aviation. Available at http://www.api.faa.gov/handbook96/toc96.htm.
Green, Donald, Karen E. Jacowitz, Daniel Kahneman, and Daniel McFadden. (1998). “Referendum Contingent Valuation, Anchoring and Willingness to Pay for Public Goods,” Resource and Energy Economics 20, 85-116.
Hammitt, James K. (1990). “Risk Perceptions and Food Choice: An Exploratory Analysis of Organic-versus Conventional-Produce Buyers,” Risk Analysis 10, 367-374.
Hammitt, James K. and John D. Graham. (1999). “Willingness to Pay for Health Protection: Inadequate Sensitivity to Probability?” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 18, 33-62.
Hanemann, W. Michael. (1994). “Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 8, 19-43.
Harsanyi, John C. (1982). “Morality and the Theory of Rational Behavior.” In Amartaya Sen and Bernard Williams (eds.), Utilitarianism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harsanyi, John C. (1995). “A Theory of Prudential Values and a Rule Utilitarian Theory of Morality,” Social Choice and Welfare 12, 319-333.
Hartog, Joop, Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell, and Nicole Jonker. (2002). “Linking Measured Risk Aversion to Individual Characteristics,” Kyklos 55, 3-26.
Jianakoplos, Nancy A. and Alexandra Bernasek. (1998). “Are Women More Risk Averse,” Economic Inquiry 36, 620-630.
Johansson-Stenman, Olof. (2002). “What Should We do with Inconsistent, Non-Welfaristic and Undeveloped Preferences?” In Daniel W. Bromley and Juoni Paavola (eds.), Economics, Ethics, and Environmental Policy: Contested Choices. Malden MA: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 103-119.
Jones-Lee, M., M. Hammerton, and P. Philips. (1985). “The Value of Safety: Results of a National Survey,” Economic Journal 95, 49-72.
Kahneman, Daniel. (1992). “Reference Points, Anchors, Norms, and Mixed Feelings,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 51, 296-312.
Kahneman, Daniel, and Jack L. Knetsch. (1992). “Valuing Public Goods: The Purchase of Moral Satisfaction,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Managements 22, 57-70.
Kahneman, Daniel, Peter P. Wakker, and Rakesh Sarin. (1997). “Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 112, 375-405.
McDonald, John F. and Robert A. Moffitt. (1980). “The Uses of Tobit Analysis,” Review of Economics and Statistics 62, 318-321.
Miller, Ted. R. (2000). “Variations between Countries in Values of Statistical Life,” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 34, 169-188.
Northcraft, Gregory B. and Margaret A. Neale. (1987). “Expert, Amateurs, and Real Estate: An Anchoring-and-Adjustment Perspective on Property Pricing Decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 39, 228-241.
Persson Ulf, Anna Norinder, Krister Hjalte, and Katarina Gralén. (2001). “The Value of a Statistical Life in Transport: Findings from a New Contingent Valuation Study in Sweden,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 23, 121-134.
Slovic, Paul. (2000). The Perception of Risk. London: Earthscan.
Subramanian, Uma and Maureen Cropper. (2000). “Public Choices Between Lifesaving Programs: The Tradeoff Between Qualitative Factors and Lives Saved,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 21, 117-149.
Sunstein, Cass R. (1997). “Bad Deaths,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 14, 259-282.
Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman. (1974). “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,” Science 185, 1124-1131.
Viscusi, W. Kip. (1992).Fatal Tradeoffs, Public and Private Responsibilities for Risk. New York: Oxford University Press.
Viscusi, W. Kip. (1998). Rational Risk Policy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Carlsson, F., Johansson-Stenman, O. & Martinsson, P. Is Transport Safety More Valuable in the Air?. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 28, 147–163 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISK.0000016141.88127.7c
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISK.0000016141.88127.7c