Anticipating impacts on health based on changes in income inequality caused by life cycles

Abstract

Purpose This paper presents a general impact assessment relationship, intended to contribute to the development of social life cycle analysis. This relationship and the conditions of its use are called the "Wilkinson pathway". When used for comparisons, the pathway assesses the anticipated change in the infant mortality rate caused by a change in income distribution in the population of a country, itself generated by an important change in a life cycle. Methods Since the 1980s, numerous authors have examined the relationship between income inequality and human health. Without formally proving so, these studies suggest that increases in inequality have negative consequences for health. First, this effect is re-examined using the most up-to-date time series data. Econometric modelling allowed calculating the coefficients of variation of infant mortality in relation to variations in income inequality for member and non-member Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, taking into account the lag time. Then, a method to translate the effect of an important economic change in a life cycle on income distribution is proposed. Results and discussion The econometric estimations show that a 1 % variation in income inequality leads to an approximately equivalent variation, with a lag time of about 15 years, in infant mortality in OECD member countries. The effect is two times larger than in non-OECD member countries. Together with input-output data, labour productivity and average wages in different economic sectors, this information makes it possible to quantify the probable effects of an important change in the life cycle production stage on income inequality and then infant mortality. Due to data constraints and the many assumptions made, the tools and results presented here should be used and interpreted cautiously. Above all, what is involved is a comparative method. An isolated result must not be interpreted in absolute terms. Conclusions This work is in line with efforts to formalize general pathways allowing a comparison of socioeconomic impacts linked to various important changes in the production stage of life cycles. There are diverse prospects for improvement. A challenge for further research will be to propose methods enabling assessments of the socioeconomic impacts generated in life cycle stages other than production.

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Approaches for Manufacturing

“…This includes missing concrete impact category definitions of SLCA and LCC, missing detailed impact pathways, as well as insufficient description of the relationship between impact categories and AoPs (Bocoum et al 2015;Chhipi-Shrestha et al 2015;Andreas Jørgensen et al 2008;Neugebauer et al 2014). First steps to address these gaps were done by establishing first impact pathways for the social dimension, describing the relation between indicators and impact categories with a focus on fair wage and level of education (Neugebauer et al 2014), and by proposing AoPs for the social and the economic dimension, such as social justice and economic stability (Neugebauer et al 2016;Neugebauer et al 2014).…”

Rigor in social life cycle assessment: improving the scientific grounding of SLCA

“…Currently, much of the SLCA literature reflects a focus on society as a collection of individuals, with impact categories used in the case studies more often focusing on an impact that falls on an individual rather than an impact to a community overall (methodological contributions examining community-level impacts include Feschet et al 2013 andBocoum et al 2015, which both address relationships between economic activity and population health). Indicators in approaches like SIA, by contrast, tend to focus more strongly on impacts to communities rather than individuals (Burdge et al 1995;Brent and Labuschagne 2006).…”

Quantification of corruption in preventative cost-based S-LCA: a contribution to the Oiconomy project

“…They demonstrate that the method works, although only for low income countries, because the Preston curve is almost flat for high income countries. In a similar way, Hutchins and Sutherland (2008) demonstrate a pathway from per capita income to child mortality, enabling a comparison of the effect of added value in different countries to child mortality, and Bocoum et al (2015) used the relation between the country level GINI (inequality) coefficient and child mortality to develop a pathway from added value to health.…”