Value of life

Last updated

The value of life is an economic value used to quantify the benefit of avoiding a fatality. [1] It is also referred to as the cost of life, value of preventing a fatality (VPF), implied cost of averting a fatality (ICAF), and value of a statistical life (VSL). In social and political sciences, it is the marginal cost of death prevention in a certain class of circumstances. In many studies the value also includes the quality of life, the expected life time remaining, as well as the earning potential of a given person especially for an after-the-fact payment in a wrongful death claim lawsuit.

Contents

As such, it is a statistical term, the value of reducing the average number of deaths by one. It is an important issue in a wide range of disciplines including economics, health care, adoption, political economy, insurance, worker safety, environmental impact assessment, globalization, [2] and process safety. [3] [4]

The motivation for placing a monetary value on life is to enable policy and regulatory analysts to allocate the limited supply of resources, infrastructure, labor, and tax revenue. Estimates for the value of a life are used to compare the life-saving and risk-reduction benefits of new policies, regulations, and projects against a variety of other factors, [2] often using a cost-benefit analysis. [3]

Estimates for the statistical value of life are published and used in practice by various government agencies. In Western countries and other liberal democracies, estimates for the value of a statistical life typically range from US$1 million–US$10 million; for example, the United States FEMA estimated the value of a statistical life at US$7.5 million in 2020. [5]

Treatment in economics and methods of calculation

There is no standard concept for the value of a specific human life in economics. However, when looking at risk/reward trade-offs that people make with regard to their health, economists often consider the value of a statistical life (VSL). The VSL is very different from the value of an actual life. It is the value placed on changes in the likelihood of death, not the price someone would pay to avoid certain death. This is best explained by way of an example. From the EPA's website:

Suppose each person in a sample of 100,000 people were asked how much he or she would be willing to pay for a reduction in their individual risk of dying by 1 in 100,000, or 0.001%, over the next year. Since this reduction in risk would mean that we would expect one fewer death among the sample of 100,000 people over the next year on average, this is sometimes described as "one statistical life saved.” Now suppose that the average response to this hypothetical question was $100. Then the total dollar amount that the group would be willing to pay to save one statistical life in a year would be $100 per person × 100,000 people, or $10 million. This is what is meant by the "value of a statistical life.” [6]

This again emphasizes that VSL is more of an estimate of willingness to pay for small reductions in mortality risks rather than how much a human life is worth. Using government spending to see how much is spent to save lives in order to estimate the average individual VSL is a popular method of calculation. The United States government does not have an official value of life threshold, but different values are used in different agencies. It might be that the government values lives quite highly or that calculation standard are not applied uniformly. [7] Using the EPA as an example, the Agency uses estimates of how much people are willing to pay for small reductions in their risks of dying from adverse health conditions that may be caused by environmental pollution in their cost-benefit analyses. [6]

Economists often estimate the VSL by looking at the risks that people are voluntarily willing to take and how much they must be paid for taking them. [8] This method is known as revealed preference, where the actions of the individual reveal how much they value something. In this context, economists would look at how much individuals are willing to pay for something that reduces their chance of dying. Similarly, compensating differentials, which are the reduced or additional wage payments that are intended to compensate workers for conveniences or downsides of a job, can be used for VSL calculations. For example, a job that is more dangerous for a worker's health might require that the worker be compensated more. The compensating differentials method has several weaknesses. One issue is that the approach assumes that people have information, which is not always available. Another issue is that people may have higher or lower perceptions of risk they are facing that do not equate to actual statistical risk. In general, it is difficult for people to accurately understand and assess risk. It is also hard to control for other aspects of a job or different types of work when using this method. [7] Overall, revealed preference may not represent population preferences as a whole because of the differences between individuals. [9]

One method that can be used to calculate VSL is summing the total present discounted value of lifetime earnings. There are a couple of problems using this method. One potential source of variability is that different discount rates can be used in this calculation, resulting in dissimilar VSL estimates. Another potential issue when using wages to value life is that the calculation does not take into account the value of time that is not spent working, such as vacation or leisure. [10] As a result, VSL estimates may be inaccurate because time spent on leisure could be valued at a higher rate than an individual's wage. [7]

Another method used to estimate VSL is contingent valuation. Contingent valuation asks individuals to value an option either that they have not chosen or are unable to currently choose. [7] Economists might estimate the VSL by simply asking people (e.g. through questionnaires) how much they would be willing to pay for a reduction in the likelihood of dying, perhaps by purchasing safety improvements. [11] These types of studies are referred to as stated preference studies. However, contingent valuation has some flaws. The first problem is known as the isolation of issues, where participants may give different values when asked to value something alone versus when they are asked to value multiple things. The order of how these issues are presented to people matters as well. [7] Another potential issue is the “embedding effect” identified by Diamond and Hausman 1994. [12] All of these methods might result in a VSL that is overstated or understated.

When calculating value of statistical life, it is important to discount and adjust it for inflation and real income growth over the years. An example of a formula needed to adjust the VSL of a specific year is given by the following:

where

VSLO = Original Base Year, VSLT = Updated Base Year, PT = Price Index in Year t, IT = Real Incomes in Year t, ε = Income Elasticity of VSL.

Value of preventing a casualty

Value of Preventing a Casualty (VPC) is a more general concept to value of preventing a fatality. [13] It means the value of preventing a fatality or a serious injury. [14] According to Economic and Social Council's provisional agenda for review and analysis of the economic costs of level crossing accidents, [15] "the value of preventing a casualty should be established by either Willingness-To-Pay or Human Capital/Lost Output approaches. It is essential to consider not only fatal injuries, but also serious (or even minor injuries) in this statistical life valuation exercise."

Comparisons to other methods

The value of statistical life (VSL) estimates are often used in the transport sector [16] and in process safety (where it may be coupled with the ALARP concept). [4] In health economics and in the pharmaceutical sector, however, the value of a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is used more often than the VSL. Both of these measures are used in cost-benefit analyses as a method of assigning a monetary value of bettering or worsening one's life conditions. While QALY measures the quality of life ranging from 0–1, VSL monetizes the values using willingness-to-pay. [17]

Researchers have first attempted to monetize QALY in the 1970s, with countless studies being done to standardize values between and within countries. However, as with the QALY, VSL estimates have also had a history of vastly differing ranges of estimates within countries, notwithstanding a standardization among countries. One of the biggest movements to do so was the EuroVaQ project which used a sample of 40,000 individuals to develop the WTP of several European countries. [18]

Policy applications

Value of life estimates are frequently used to estimate the benefits added due to a new policy or act passed by the government. One example is the 6-year retroactive study on the benefits and costs of the 1970 Clean Air Act[ clarification needed ] in the period from 1970 to 1990. This study was commissioned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Air and Radiation and Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, but was carried out by an independent board of public health experts, economists, and scientists headed by Dr. Richard Schmalensee of MIT. [19]

On conducting the benefit-cost analysis, the team measured each dollar value of an environmental benefit by estimating a how many dollars a person is willing to pay in order to decrease or eliminate a current threat to their health, otherwise known as their "willingness-to-pay" (WTP). The WTP of the U.S. population was estimated and summed for separate categories including mortality, chronic bronchitis, hypertension, IQ changes, and strokes. Thus, the individual WTPs were added to get the value of a statistical life (VSL) for each category considered in the valuation of the act's benefits. [20] Each valuation in figure 1 was the product of several studies which compiled both solicited WTP information from individuals and WTP estimates from risk compensation demanded in the current labor market and was averaged to find a singular VSL. Such data from the labor market was taken from the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. [21]

For example, the valuation estimates used for mortality were divided by the typical life expectancy of each survey sample in order to get a dollar estimate per life-year lost or saved which was discounted with a 5 percent discount rate. [22]

Using these estimates, the paper concluded that the benefits, ranging from $5.6 to $49.4 trillion in 1990 dollars, of implementing the Clean Air Act from 1970 to 1990 outweighed the economic costs of $523 billion in 1990 dollars. [23]

Estimates of the value of life

Equivalent parameters are used in many countries, with significant variation in the value assigned. [2]

International VSL with data values International VSL with data values.png
International VSL with data values

European Union

ERA fall back VPC in 2016 in € [14]
CountryFatalitySerious InjurySlight injury
Austria3,601,014569,38743,974
Belgium3,582,968550,05642,488
Bulgaria1,728,479242,13318,703
Croatia2,541,972355,63627,459
Czech Republic3,028,481428,34633,055
Denmark3,988,844622,28648,084
Estonia2,921,585416,08532,124
Finland3,248,716517,25239,987
France3,122,352486,85637,628
Germany3,455,179539,34641,660
Greece2,326,951356,12727,527
Hungary2,761,351383,03429,559
Ireland5,085,099747,91057,709
Italy3,248,106501,49838,735
Latvia2,338,370337,23426,049
Lithuania2,697,114389,64330,071
Luxembourg6,491,289996,41276,843
Netherlands3,550,348543,93842,020
Norway3,402,766573,32444,341
Poland2,412,823341,45826,356
Portugal2,541,032385,93429,815
Romania2,443,038339,58826,203
Slovakia2,846,309404,48131,222
Slovenia2,425,302364,65528,182
Spain3,019,875458,20735,392
Sweden3,296,192520,78240,270
Switzerland4,422,265759,44058,666
United Kingdom2,873,899481,45937,222
EU average3,273,910498,59138,514

Sweden

In Sweden, the value of a statistical life has been estimated from 9 to 98 million SEK (€0.9 - 10.6 million). [24]

  • 34.6 million SEK (€3.7 million) mean of studies in Sweden from 1995 and on
  • 23 million SEK (€2.5 million) median of studies in Sweden from 1995 and on
  • 22 million SEK (€2.4 million) recommended by official authorities

Australia

In Australia, the value of a statistical life has been set at:

India

Using a hedonic wage approach, the VSL in India among blue-collar male workers in manufacturing industries of Ahmedabad, Gujarat has been estimated to be 44.69 million INR ($0.64 million) in 2018. [25]

New Zealand

In New Zealand, the value of a statistical life has been set at:

Singapore

The value of statistical life (VSL) in Singapore was estimated in 2007 via a contingent valuation survey that elicits willingness-to-pay (WTP) for mortality risk reductions, which interviewed 801 Singaporeans and Singapore Permanent Residents aged 40 and above, entailing a value of statistical life of approximately S$850,000 to S$2.05 million (in 2007 S$, which is approximately 1.36 S$ in 2022). Mean WTP was also shown to have an inverse relationship with age, and is about 20% lower for persons aged 70 and older. Consistent with existing literature, the study also finds that mean WTP is not affected by physical health; but is affected by mental health. In addition, mean WTP is not affected by covariates such as gender, race, and personal income, but is affected by covariates such as household income, age, occupation and level of education. [30]

For traffic accidents, the WTP-based VSL was estimated in 2008 at S$1.87 million (in 2008 S$, which is approximately 1.27 S$ in 2022). This was also compared against WTP-based VSL estimates in other countries, including 4.63 million for the US, 3.11 million for Sweden, 2.41 million for the UK, 2.38 million for New Zealand and 1.76 million for the EU (in 2008 S$). [31]

The VSL obtained by other methods may differ significantly. For instance, if the VSL is estimated from the World Bank VSL adjusted to country-specific gross domestic product, which reflects a human capital approach, then the VSL in Singapore would be calculated to be US$8.96 million in 2014 (S$11.3 million in 2014, in 2014 S$, which is approximately 1.09 S$ in 2022). [32]

Turkey

Studies by Hacettepe University estimated the VSL at about half a million purchasing power parity adjusted 2012 US dollars, [33] the value of a healthier and longer life (VHLL) for Turkey at about 42,000 lira (about $27,600 in PPP-adjusted 2012 USD), and the value of a life year (VOLY) as about 10,300 TL (about $6,800 in PPP-adjusted 2012 USD), all as of 2012. [34]

As of 2016 the estimated produced economic value for a life time for Turkey was US$59,000 which was 5.4 times GDP per capita. [35]

Russia

According to different estimates life value in Russia varies from $40,000 up to $2 million. On the results of opinion poll life value (as the cost of financial compensation for the death) in the beginning of 2015 was about $71,500. [36]

United Kingdom

As of 2013, the value of preventing a fatal casualty was £1.7m (2013 prices) in UK. [37]

United States

The following estimates have been applied to the value of life. The estimates are either for one year of additional life or for the statistical value of a single life.

The income elasticity of the value of statistical life has been estimated at 0.5 to 0.6. [45] Developing markets have smaller statistical value of life. [45] The statistical value of life also decreases with age. [45]

Historically, children were valued little monetarily, but changes in cultural norms have resulted in a substantial increase as evinced by trends in damage compensation from wrongful death lawsuits. [46]

Uses

Knowing the value of life is helpful when performing a cost-benefit analysis, especially in regard to public policy. In order to decide whether or not a policy is worth undertaking, it is important to accurately measure costs and benefits. Public programs that deal with things like safety (i.e. highways, disease control, housing) require accurate valuations in order to budget spending. [47]

Since resources are finite, trade-offs are inevitable, even regarding potential life-or-death decisions. The assignment of a value to individual life is one possible approach to attempting to make rational decisions about these trade-offs.

When deciding on the appropriate level of health care spending, a typical method is to equate the marginal cost of the health care to the marginal benefits received. [48] In order to obtain a marginal benefit amount, some estimation of the dollar value of life is required. One notable example was found by Stanford professor Stefanos Zenios, whose team calculated the cost-effectiveness of kidney dialysis. His team found that the VSL implied by then current dialysis practice averages about US$129,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). [49] This calculation has important implications for health care as Zenios explained:

"That means that if Medicare paid an additional $129,000 to treat a group of patients, on average, group members would get one more quality-adjusted life year." [50]

In risk management activities such as in the areas of workplace safety, and insurance, it is often useful to put a precise economic value on a given life. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration under the Department of Labor sets penalties and regulations for companies to comply with safety standards to prevent workplace injuries and deaths. [51] It can be argued that these high penalties are intended to act as a deterrent so that companies have an incentive to avoid them. As such, the price of the fines would have to be roughly equivalent to the value of a human life. Although some studies of the effectiveness of fines as a deterrent have found mixed results. [52]

In transportation modes it is very important to consider the external cost that is paid by the society but is not calculated, for making it more sustainable. The external cost, although consisting of impacts on climate, crops and public health among others, is largely determined by impacts on mortality rate.

Criticisms

The value of a statistical life has come under criticism from a range of sources both in economics and philosophy. [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] These criticisms range from concerns with the specific methodology used, to value a statistical life to the very prospect of valuing life and using it in cost benefit analyses.

Concerns with aggregation

Some economists have argued that the value of a statistical life should be "disaggregated" to better capture the differences in mortality risk reduction preferences. [54] [53] Cass Sunstein and others have argued that the value of a statistical life should vary by type of risks, as people are more concerned about some risks than others, and by individuals, as some people are more risk seeking than others. [58] [54] This is proposed to ensure the accuracy of the measurement, as using an average may force some people to pay more than they are willing to for risk reduction, and prevent policies from being enacted for people who are willing to pay more than average for mortality risk reduction. [59]

Concerns with valuing life

Some philosophers and policymakers have concerns about the underlying idea of valuing a statistical life at all. While some of these concerns represent a misunderstanding of what is meant by the value of a statistical life, many express concerns with the project of valuing lives. [54] [55] Elizabeth Anderson and other philosophers have argued that the methods for measuring the value of a statistical life are insufficiently accurate as they rely on wage studies that are conducted in non-competitive labor markets where workers have insufficient information about their working conditions to accurately determine the risk of death from taking a particular job. [60] [56] Further these philosophers contend that some goods (including mortality risk, as well as environmental goods) are simply incommensurate, it is impossible to compare them, and therefore impossible to monetize them and put them on a single scale, making the very practice of valuing a statistical life problematic. [61] [56] [62]

Economists have responded to the more superficial concerns by advocating renaming or rebranding the value of a statistical life as a "micromort" or the amount someone would be willing to pay to reduce a one in one million risk of death, though philosophers contend that this does not resolve the underlying issues. [55] [54]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental economics</span> Sub-field of economics

Environmental economics is a sub-field of economics concerned with environmental issues. It has become a widely studied subject due to growing environmental concerns in the twenty-first century. Environmental economics "undertakes theoretical or empirical studies of the economic effects of national or local environmental policies around the world. ... Particular issues include the costs and benefits of alternative environmental policies to deal with air pollution, water quality, toxic substances, solid waste, and global warming."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Actuarial science</span> Statistics applied to risk in insurance and other financial products

Actuarial science is the discipline that applies mathematical and statistical methods to assess risk in insurance, pension, finance, investment and other industries and professions.

Cost–benefit analysis (CBA), sometimes also called benefit–cost analysis, is a systematic approach to estimating the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives. It is used to determine options which provide the best approach to achieving benefits while preserving savings in, for example, transactions, activities, and functional business requirements. A CBA may be used to compare completed or potential courses of action, and to estimate or evaluate the value against the cost of a decision, project, or policy. It is commonly used to evaluate business or policy decisions, commercial transactions, and project investments. For example, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission must conduct cost-benefit analyses before instituting regulations or deregulations.

In psychology and behavioral economics, the endowment effect, also known as divestiture aversion, is the finding that people are more likely to retain an object they own than acquire that same object when they do not own it. The endowment theory can be defined as "an application of prospect theory positing that loss aversion associated with ownership explains observed exchange asymmetries."

Contingent valuation is a survey-based economic technique for the valuation of non-market resources, such as environmental preservation or the impact of externalities like pollution. While these resources do give people utility, certain aspects of them do not have a market price as they are not directly sold – for example, people receive benefit from a beautiful view of a mountain, but it would be tough to value using price-based models. Contingent valuation surveys are one technique which is used to measure these aspects. Contingent valuation is often referred to as a stated preference model, in contrast to a price-based revealed preference model. Both models are utility-based. Typically the survey asks how much money people would be willing to pay to maintain the existence of an environmental feature, such as biodiversity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Preventive healthcare</span> Prevention of the occurrence of diseases

Preventive healthcare, or prophylaxis, is the application of healthcare measures to prevent diseases. Disease and disability are affected by environmental factors, genetic predisposition, disease agents, and lifestyle choices, and are dynamic processes that begin before individuals realize they are affected. Disease prevention relies on anticipatory actions that can be categorized as primal, primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention.

Ecosystem valuation is an economic process which assigns a value to an ecosystem and/or its ecosystem services. By quantifying, for example, the human welfare benefits of a forest to reduce flooding and erosion while sequestering carbon, providing habitat for endangered species, and absorbing harmful chemicals, such monetization ideally provides a tool for policy-makers and conservationists to evaluate management impacts and compare a cost-benefit analysis of potential policies. However, such valuations are estimates, and involve the inherent quantitative uncertainty and philosophical debate of evaluating a range non-market costs and benefits.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quality-adjusted life year</span> Measure of disease burden

The quality-adjusted life year (QALY) is a generic measure of disease burden, including both the quality and the quantity of life lived. It is used in economic evaluation to assess the value of medical interventions. One QALY equates to one year in perfect health. QALY scores range from 1 to 0 (dead). QALYs can be used to inform health insurance coverage determinations, treatment decisions, to evaluate programs, and to set priorities for future programs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shadow price</span> Term in economics

A shadow price is the monetary value assigned to an abstract or intangible commodity which is not traded in the marketplace. This often takes the form of an externality. Shadow prices are also known as the recalculation of known market prices in order to account for the presence of distortionary market instruments. Shadow prices are the real economic prices given to goods and services after they have been appropriately adjusted by removing distortionary market instruments and incorporating the societal impact of the respective good or service. A shadow price is often calculated based on a group of assumptions and estimates because it lacks reliable data, so it is subjective and somewhat inaccurate.

The embedding effect is an issue in environmental economics and other branches of economics where researchers wish to identify the value of a specific public good using a contingent valuation or willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach. The problem arises because public goods belong to society as a whole, and are generally not traded in the market. Because market prices cannot be used to value them, researchers ask a sample of people how much they are willing to pay for the public good, wildlife preservation for example. The results can be misleading because of the difficulty, for individual society members, of identifying the particular value that they attach to one particular thing which is embedded in a collection of similar things. A similar problem occurs with a wider selection of public goods. The embedding effect suggests the contingent valuation method is not an unbiased approach to measuring policy impacts for cost-benefit analysis of environmental, and other government policies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic analysis of climate change</span> Using economic tools to investigate climate change

An economic analysis of climate change uses economic tools and models to calculate the magnitude and distribution of damages caused by climate change. It can also give guidance for the best policies for mitigation and adaptation to climate change from an economic perspective. There are many economic models and frameworks. For example, in a cost–benefit analysis, the trade offs between climate change impacts, adaptation, and mitigation are made explicit. For this kind of analysis, integrated assessment models (IAMs) are useful. Those models link main features of society and economy with the biosphere and atmosphere into one modelling framework. The total economic impacts from climate change are difficult to estimate. In general, they increase the more the global surface temperature increases.

The travel cost method of economic valuation, travel cost analysis, or Clawson method is a revealed preference method of economic valuation used in cost–benefit analysis to calculate the value of something that cannot be obtained through market prices. The aim of the method is to calculate willingness to pay for a constant price facility. The technique was first suggested by the statistician Harold Hotelling in a 1947 letter to the director of the National Park Service of the United States for a method to measure the benefit of National Parks to the public. The method was further refined by Trice and Wood (1958) and Clawson (1959). The technique is one approach to the estimation of a shadow price.

A micromort is a unit of risk defined as a one-in-a-million chance of death. Micromorts can be used to measure the riskiness of various day-to-day activities. A microprobability is a one-in-a million chance of some event; thus, a micromort is the microprobability of death. The micromort concept was introduced by Ronald A. Howard who pioneered the modern practice of decision analysis.

The Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) is an open source, Windows-based computer program created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that estimates the health benefits from improvements in air quality. State, local and international users have used BenMAP to estimate the health benefits of improved air quality. BenMAP includes information users need to start performing a benefits analysis; advanced users can customize the program to meet their needs. Because BenMAP is based on a GIS, the results can be mapped for ease of presentation.

In economics, willingness to accept (WTA) is the minimum monetary amount that а person is willing to accept to sell a good or service, or to bear a negative externality, such as pollution. This is in contrast to willingness to pay (WTP), which is the maximum amount of money a consumer is willing to sacrifice to purchase a good/service or avoid something undesirable. The price of any transaction will thus be any point between a buyer's willingness to pay and a seller's willingness to accept; the net difference is the economic surplus.

<i>The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity</i> Study

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) was a study led by Pavan Sukhdev from 2007 to 2011. It is an international initiative to draw attention to the global economic benefits of biodiversity. Its objective is to highlight the growing cost of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation and to draw together expertise from the fields of science, economics and policy to enable practical actions. TEEB aims to assess, communicate and mainstream the urgency of actions through its five deliverables—D0: science and economic foundations, policy costs and costs of inaction, D1: policy opportunities for national and international policy-makers, D2: decision support for local administrators, D3: business risks, opportunities and metrics and D4: citizen and consumer ownership.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cam Donaldson</span> Scottish economist

Cameron Richard Donaldson is a Scottish economist who is Yunus Chair and distinguished Professor of Health Economics at Glasgow Caledonian University, the University for the Common Good. From 2016 to 2021, he was Pro Vice Chancellor Research, during which time Glasgow Caledonian became the first university to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals as the framework for its Research Strategy. Donaldson is also a Professor of Health Economics at the Australian National University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">W. Kip Viscusi</span> American economist (born 1949)

William Viscusi is an American economist whose primary fields of research are the economics of risk and uncertainty, risk and environmental regulation, behavioral economics, and law and economics. Viscusi is the University Distinguished Professor of Law, Economics, and Management at Vanderbilt Law School where he and his wife, Joni Hersch, are the founders and co-directors of the Ph.D. Program in Law and Economics. Prior to his appointment at Vanderbilt, Viscusi was the first John F. Cogan, Jr. Professor of Law and Economics at Harvard Law School and Director of the Harvard Program on Empirical Legal Studies. Viscusi is the author of Pricing Lives: Guideposts for a Safer Society.

Susana Mourato is a professor of environmental economics at the London School of Economics and Political Science. She holds a leader position at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Natural resource valuation</span> Concept of natural resource economics

Natural resource valuation is a process of providing of benefits, costs, damage of or to natural and environmental resources. It has a fundamental role in the practice of cost-benefit analysis of health, safety, and environmental issues.

References

  1. 1 2 "Best Practice Regulation Guidance Note: Value of statistical life" (PDF). Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Australian Government. October 2023.
  2. 1 2 3 Miller, Ted R. (2000). "Variations between Countries in Values of Statistical Life". Journal of Transport Economics and Policy . 34: 169–188. ISSN   0022-5258.
  3. 1 2 Franks, Andrew; Whitehead, Richard; Crossthwaite, Phil; Small, Louise (2002). Application of QRA in Operational Safety Issues. Research Report 025. Sudbury: HSE Books. ISBN   0-7176-2570-2.
  4. 1 2 Rausand, Marvin (2011). Risk Assessment: Theory, Methods, and Applications. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN   978-0-470-63764-7.
  5. 1 2 "FEMA Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Toolkit 6.0 Release Notes" (PDF). 2020-07-31. Retrieved 2021-10-29.
  6. 1 2 "Mortality Risk Valuation". EPA. 2014-04-21. Retrieved 2017-04-25.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 Gruber, Jonathan. Public Finance and Public Policy (5 ed.). Worth Publisher. pp. 226–233.
  8. ↑ Mankiw, Gregory (2012). Principles of Economics. Cengage Learning. ISBN   978-0-538-45305-9.
  9. ↑ Rohlfs, Chris (2015). "New Estimates of the Value of a Statistical Life Using Air Bag Regulations as a Quasi-experiment". American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. 7 (1): 331–59. doi:10.1257/pol.20110309. hdl: 10419/67207 .
  10. ↑ Keeler, Emmett (2001). "The value of remaining lifetime is close to estimated values of life". Journal of Health Economics. 20 (1): 141–143. doi:10.1016/S0167-6296(00)00070-9. PMID   11148869.
  11. ↑ Murphy, JJ (2005). "A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation". Environmental and Resource Economics: 152.
  12. ↑ Diamond, Peter (1994). "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8 (4): 45–64. doi: 10.1257/jep.8.4.45 .
  13. ↑ Linden, Mathias; Kortzfleisch, Harald von; Arndt, Manfred (2015). "1C23 Railway accident costs: Determining the value of preventing a casualty by analyzing national investigation bodies reports(Safety-Infrastructure)". The Proceedings of International Symposium on Seed-Up and Service Technology for Railway and Maglev Systems : Stech. 2015: _1C23–1_–_1C23-8_. doi:10.1299/jsmestech.2015._1C23-1_.
  14. 1 2 "IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR CSIs ANNEX I OF DIRECTIVE (EU) 2016/798" (PDF). 2016. Retrieved 7 April 2024.
  15. ↑ "ECE/TRANS/WP.1/GE.1/12" (PDF). Retrieved 7 April 2024.
  16. ↑ Milne, Jonathan (2006-10-22). "The Hidden Price Put on Your Life". The Times . Archived from the original on 2022-08-20. Retrieved 2023-07-17.
  17. ↑ Viscussi, W. Kip (2005). "The Value of Life" (PDF). Harvard John M. Olin Discussion Paper Series (517).
  18. ↑ "European Value of a Quality Adjusted Life Year". Newcastle University.
  19. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (October 1997). "The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990- Retrospective Study". Environmental Economics Research Inventory: I-3.
  20. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (October 1997). "The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990- Retrospective Study". Environmental Economics Research Inventory: 44.
  21. ↑ "Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI)- Current and Revised Data". Bureau of Labor Statistics. United States Department of Labor.
  22. ↑ Viscusi, W. Kip (1995). Fatal Tradeoffs . New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0195102932.
  23. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (October 1997). "The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990- Retrospective Study". Environmental Economics Research Inventory: 8.
  24. ↑ Hultkrantz, Lars (20 September 2012). "The value of a statistical life in Sweden: A review of the empirical literature". Health Policy. 108 (2–3): 302–310. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.09.007. PMID   23084655.
  25. ↑ Majumder, Agamoni; Madheswaran, S. (2018). Value of Statistical Life in India: A Hedonic Wage Approach (PDF). Institute for Social and Economic Change. ISBN   978-81-7791-263-0.
  26. 1 2 "Social cost of road crashes and injuries 2016 update" (PDF). NZTA. March 2017.
  27. ↑ "Guide to Social Cost Benefit Analysis". The Treasury. 27 July 2015.
  28. ↑ "Social cost of road crashes and injuries 2019 update".
  29. ↑ "Cost of long-term conditions in New Zealand" (PDF).
  30. ↑ Hoon, Shi; Lim, Khee Meng (2008). "The value of statistical life in Singapore".
  31. ↑ "Deriving Accident Costs using Willingness-to-Pay | Approaches - A Case Study for Singapore" . Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  32. ↑ Egerstrom, N.; Rojas-Rueda, D.; Martuzzi, M.; Jalaludin, B.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.; So, R.; Lim, Y. H.; Loft, S.; Andersen, Z. J.; Cole-Hunter, T. (2022). "Health and economic benefits of meeting WHO air quality guidelines, Western Pacific Region". Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 101 (2): 130–139. doi:10.2471/BLT.22.288938. PMC   9874370 . PMID   36733628.
  33. ↑ Ara, Shihomi; Tekeşin, Cem (4 July 2014). "Measuring the Value of Mortality Risk Reductions in Turkey". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 11 (7): 6890–6922. doi: 10.3390/ijerph110706890 . PMC   4113852 . PMID   25000150.
  34. ↑ Tekeşin, Cem; Ara, Shihomi (29 September 2017). "The Monetary Valuation of Lifetime Health Improvement and Life Expectancy Gains in Turkey". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 14 (10): 1151. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14101151 . PMC   5664652 . PMID   28961227.
  35. ↑ Tuna, E.; Yenilmez, F. B.; Kockaya, G. (2016-11-01). "Estimation Of Value Of Life With A Model Approach Depending On Net Present Value For Turkey". Value in Health. 19 (7): A477. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.09.756 . ISSN   1098-3015.
  36. ↑ "Стоимость человеческой жизни в России в 2015 году составила 4,5 млн. рублей" (PDF). Center for Strategic Researches RGS.
  37. ↑ "UK Transport Safety: Who is responsible?" (PDF). March 2015. Retrieved 7 April 2024.
  38. ↑ Hirth, Richard A. (2000). "Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard". Medical Decision Making. 20 (3): 332–342. doi:10.1177/0272989X0002000310. PMID   10929856. S2CID   25646395.
  39. 1 2 Kingsbury, Kathleen (20 May 2008). "The Value of a Human Life: $129,000". Time. Archived from the original on May 27, 2008.
  40. ↑ Lee, Chris P. (2009). "An Empiric Estimate of the Value of Life: Updating the Renal Dialysis Cost-Effectiveness Standard". Value in Health. 12 (1): 80–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00401.x . PMID   19911442.
  41. ↑ Appelbaum, Binyamin (Feb 16, 2011). "As U.S. Agencies Put More Value on a Life, Businesses Fret". The New York Times.
  42. ↑ "Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life" (PDF). US Department of Transportation. 13 June 2014.
  43. ↑ "DoT 2016" (PDF). 2016-08-08. Retrieved 2017-04-23.
  44. 1 2 "Departmental Guidance on Valuation of a Statistical Life in Economic Analysis". U.S. Department of Transportation. 23 March 2021. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
  45. 1 2 3 Viscusi, W. Kip; Aldy, Joseph 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. doi:10.1023/A:1025598106257. S2CID   189928888.
  46. ↑ Mayyasi, Alex (30 June 2016). "How Children Went from Worthless to Priceless". Priceonomics. Retrieved 8 July 2016.
  47. ↑ Rice, Dorothy (1967). "The Economic Value of Human Life". American Journal of Public Health. 57 (11): 1954–1966. doi:10.2105/AJPH.57.11.1954. PMC   1227852 . PMID   6069745.
  48. ↑ Hall, Robert (2007). "The Value of Life and the Rise of Health Spending" (PDF). Quarterly Journal of Economics. 122: 39–72. doi:10.1162/qjec.122.1.39. S2CID   1542501.
  49. ↑ Zenios, Stefanos (2009). "An Empiric Estimate of the Value of Life: Updating the Renal Dialysis Cost-Effectiveness Standard". Value in Health. 12 (1): 80–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00401.x . PMID   19911442.
  50. ↑ Kingsbury, Kathleen (2008-05-20). "The Value of a Human Life: $129,000". TIME. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  51. ↑ "OSHA". OSHA. Department of Labor. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  52. ↑ Kennedy, Christopher (1985). "Criminal Sentences for Corporations: Alternative Fining Mechanisms". California Law Review. 73 (2). doi:10.15779/Z385X6G.
  53. 1 2 Sunstein, Cass (2004-11-01). "Valuing Life: A Plea for Disaggregation". Duke Law Journal. 54 (2): 385–445. ISSN   0012-7086. PMID   15940845.
  54. 1 2 3 4 5 Cameron, Trudy Ann (2010-07-01). "Euthanizing the Value of a Statistical Life". Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. 4 (2): 161–178. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.722.7945 . doi:10.1093/reep/req010. ISSN   1750-6816.
  55. 1 2 3 Carneades (2022). Are All Lives Equal? Why Cost Benefit Analysis Values Rich Lives More and How Philosophy Can Fix it. Carneades.org. ISBN   979-8986128610.
  56. 1 2 3 Anderson, Elizabeth (1993). Value in ethics and economics. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN   0-674-93189-0. OCLC   27430064.
  57. ↑ John, Stephen David; Curran, Emma J. (2021-03-19). "Costa, cancer and coronavirus: contractualism as a guide to the ethics of lockdown". Journal of Medical Ethics. 48 (9): 643–650. doi:10.1136/medethics-2020-107103. ISSN   0306-6800. PMC   7985975 . PMID   33741680.
  58. ↑ Sunstein, Cass (2004-11-01). "Valuing Life: A Plea for Disaggregation". Duke Law Journal. 54 (2): 385–445. ISSN   0012-7086. PMID   15940845. First, VSL should vary across risks. For example, people are willing to pay high amounts to avoid cancer risks, and hence there is reason to think that people's VSL is higher for cancer deaths than for sudden, unanticipated deaths. Cancer risks are involved in the work of many regulatory agencies, and people seem to be particularly concerned about such risks, in a way that should produce a high VSL- almost unquestionably higher than the values that agencies now use. More generally, deaths that produce unusual fear, or that are accompanied by high levels of pain and suffering, should be expected to produce a higher VSL. Human beings face countless mortality risks, and it would be truly bizarre to maintain that people value avoiding each of those risks identically. Second, VSL should vary across individuals, simply because different people are willing to pay different amounts to avoid risks. People who are risk averse will be willing to pay more, and will therefore show a higher VSL, than people who are risk-seeking. Those who are rich will show a higher VSL than those who are poor. People who are thirty might well show a higher VSL than people who are sixty. It follows that different demographic groups will show diversity in their VSLs as well.
  59. ↑ Carneades (2022). Are All Lives Equal? Why Cost Benefit Analysis Values Rich Lives More and How Philosophy Can Fix it. Carneades.org. ISBN   979-8986128610. we should value risks by demographic groups so that if a particular group is more impacted by a risk than another, we can use a more accurate value of a statistical life for that group. This will assure that the government neither imposes undue costs or fails to eliminate risks that individuals would be willing to pay to eliminate.
  60. ↑ Ackerman, Frank (2004). Priceless: on knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. Lisa Heinzerling. New Press. ISBN   1-56584-850-0. OCLC   52819812.
  61. ↑ Sagoff, Mark (2004). Price, principle, and the environment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN   0-511-23172-5. OCLC   76951369.
  62. ↑ Carneades (25 June 2022). Are All Lives Equal? Why Cost Benefit Analysis Values Rich Lives More and How Philosophy Can Fix it. Carneades.org. ISBN   979-8986128610. If there are some goods that cannot be compared, then the project of attempting to monetize all of the benefits and costs for comparison is flawed from the start. If you accept this position, you may have a way out of the original problematic conclusion. If we cannot compare the value of a life and other benefits, then the problem of disparately valued lives comes from trying to convert a life into something with which it cannot be compared: money.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.