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

Viscusi, W. Kip; Gentry, Elissa Philip

doi:10.1007/s11166-015-9219-2

Cited by 35 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…12 As noted earlier, the Kniesner et al study is not included in Table II because it addresses only men but has the advantage of relying on longitudinal data. 13 The 17 studies include Aldy and Viscusi (2008), Evans and Schaur (2010), Hersch and Viscusi (2010), Kniesner and Viscusi (2005), Kniesner et al (2012), Kniesner, Viscusi, and Ziliak (2006, 2014, Kochi and Taylor (2011), Scotton (2013), Scotton and Taylor (2011), Viscusi (2003, 2004, Viscusi and Aldy (2007), Viscusi and Hersch (2008), and Viscusi and Philip (2014). Some of these studies do not meet all of our selection criteria, but the controls that Viscusi (2015) included for study characteristics address many of the concerns that led to their exclusion.…”

Section: Revealed-preference Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Reductions in Fatal Illness Risks: Implications of Recent Research

Robinson

Hammitt

2015

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The value of mortality risk reductions, conventionally expressed as the value per statistical life, is an important determinant of the net benefits of many government policies. US regulators currently rely primarily on studies of fatal injuries, raising questions about whether different values might be appropriate for risks associated with fatal illnesses. Our review suggests that, despite the substantial expansion of the research base in recent years, few US studies of illness-related risks meet criteria for quality, and those that do yield similar values to studies of injury-related risks. Given this result, combining the findings of these few studies with the findings of the more robust literature on injury-related risks appears to provide a reasonable range of estimates for application in regulatory analysis. Our review yields estimates ranging from about $4.2 million to $13.7 million with a mid-point of $9.0 million (2013 dollars). Although the studies we identify differ from those that underlie the values currently used by Federal agencies, the resulting estimates are remarkably similar, suggesting that there is substantial consensus emerging on the values applicable to the general US population. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Revealed-preference Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Reductions in Fatal Illness Risks: Implications of Recent Research

Robinson

Hammitt

2015

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Viscusi and Gentry () provide evidence that VSL labor market estimates generalize across transport and nontransport contexts in the United States.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Worker Investments in Safety, Workplace Accidents, and Compensating Wage Differentials

Guardado

Ziebarth

2018

Int Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The theory of compensating wage differentials (CWDs) assumes that firms supply and workers demand workplace safety, predicting a positive relationship between accident risk and wages. This article allows for safety provision by workers, which predicts a countervailing negative relationship between individual risk and wages: Firms pay higher wages for higher safety-related productivity. Using National Longitudinal Survey of Youth panel data and data on fatal and nonfatal accidents, our precise CWDs imply a value of a statistical injury of $45.4 thousand and a value of a statistical life of $6.3 million. In line with our model, individual risk and wages are negatively correlated. * Manuscript

show abstract

“…Another limitation is that we ignored changes in wage premiums paid to induce workers to take risky jobs as drivers 22. In reality, the gradual reduction in injury rates should have lowered those risk premiums, thus reducing labour costs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%