Résumé
We examine how different welfarist frameworks evaluate the social value of mortality riskreduction. These frameworks include classical, distributively unweighted cost-benefit analysis—i.e., the “value per statistical life” (VSL) approach—and three benchmark social welfare functions (SWF): a utilitarian SWF, an ex ante prioritarian SWF, and an ex post prioritarian SWF. We examine the conditions on individual utility and on the SWF under which these frameworks display the following five properties: i) wealth sensitivity, ii) sensitivity to baseline risk, iii) equal value of risk reduction, iv) preference for risk equity, and v) catastrophe aversion. We show that the particular manner in which VSL ranks risk-reduction measures is not necessarily shared by other welfarist frameworks, and we identify when the use of an ex ante or an ex post approach has different implications for risk policymaking.
Mots-clés
Value of statistical life; social welfare functions; cost-benefit analysis; equity;
Codes JEL
- D61: Allocative Efficiency • Cost–Benefit Analysis
- D63: Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
- D81: Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
- Q51: Valuation of Environmental Effects
Remplacé par
Matthew Adler, James K. Hammitt et Nicolas Treich, « The social value of mortality risk reduction: The VSL versus the social welfare function approach », Journal of Health Economics, vol. 35, mai 2014, p. 82–93.
Référence
Matthew Adler, James K. Hammitt et Nicolas Treich, « The Social Value of Mortality Risk Reduction: VSL vs. the Social Welfare Function Approach », TSE Working Paper, n° 12-292, mars 2012.
Voir aussi
Publié dans
TSE Working Paper, n° 12-292, mars 2012