Skip Navigation

Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 2007 1(2):283-299; doi:10.1093/reep/rem018
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, L. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow I12 - Health Production
Right arrow I18 - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
Right arrow J14 - Economics of the Elderly; Economics of the Handicapped
Right arrow J17 - Value of Life; Forgone Income
Right arrow J18 - Public Policy
Right arrow Q51 - Valuation of Environmental Effects
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.

Policy Monitor

How US Government Agencies Value Mortality Risk Reductions

Lisa A. Robinson*

* Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, Harvard University

Robinson{at}hsph.harvard.edu

Lisa.A.Robinson{at}comcast.net

One challenging task faced by US government agencies is determining whether the benefits of their proposed regulations justify the costs. For benefits associated with reducing the risks of premature mortality, they rely on an analytic construct—the value per statistical life (VSL)—which aggregates the value of small changes in mortality risk across a large population; it is not the value of saving a particular person's life. Empirical research suggests that this value ranges from roughly $1 million to $10 million per statistical life. While federal agencies usually apply values from within this range, they vary in the exact estimates used.

The research literature generally addresses mortality risks and populations that differ in some significant respects from those addressed by most major regulations. A particularly contentious issue has been whether to adjust the estimates to reflect age differences. One approach involves translating VSL estimates into a value per statistical life year (VSLY) to take into account the number of years of life extension. Because the years of life extension are closely related to age, the use of a VSLY approach generally results in lower values for older individuals. However, the relationship of the VSL to age or life expectancy is complex, and such adjustments have raised significant concerns about the equitable treatment of individuals of different ages in the development of federal policy.


I would like to thank Maureen Cropper and James K. Hammitt for their many thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this article. In addition, Lawrence Blincoe, Chris P. Dockins, Patricia Hall, Bryan J. Hubbell, Alan Krupnick, Kelly B. Maguire, Clark Nardinelli, James E. Neumann, and Nathalie B. Simon provided helpful information and advice and Suzanne Leonard improved the presentation. Remaining errors are, of course, my own.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.