Using value of statistical life for the ex ante evaluation of transport policy options: a discussion based on ethical theory

Abstract

This paper aims to discuss a number of questions that are highly important for the ex ante evaluation of the safety impacts of transport policy options, from the perspective of ethical theory: (1) Is it morally OK to express prevention on acceptance of fatalities or risks in monetary terms? (2) How useful is the concept of the value of a statistical life (VOSL) for ex ante evaluations of transport policy options? (3) What are the pros and cons of pricing protection of lives or prevention of risks in ex ante evaluations? (4) Which methods are available for expressing (protection of) human lives in monetary terms, and what are the main related methodological discussions? (5) Are all safety-related costs generally included in ex ante evaluations of the safety impacts of transport policy options, and if not: what is the relevance of excluded costs categories from an ethical perspective? (6) How important is the distribution of safety effects from an ethical perspective? The answer to the first question highly depends on the ethical theory that is used. With respect to question 2 we think that the VOSL is a useful concept, but that its application is not straightforward, for several reasons. Thirdly we think that probably pricing safety improves the quality of decision making, but to the best of our knowledge there is no research to underpin this expectation. The answer to question 4 is that several methods exist to estimate the value of a statistical life (VOSL), willingness-to-pay (WTP) methods being the most common category of methods. However, several methodological issues arise that make estimates of VOSL less straightforward. With respect to question 5 we conclude that behaviour-related avoidance costs are often overlooked and that these costs are relevant from an ethical perspective because the freedom to move and the freedom to participate in activities are challenged. Finally the answer to question 6 is that from an ethical perspective, in terms of the evaluation of policy measures, it might matter which groups of the population are the victims of the transport system, or are at risk.

Cost of Road Traffic Injuries in Iran: A mini-systematic review

“…The WTP method is based on basic assumptions, and suggests that the decisions taken in the public sector, about resource allocation, should be based on the citizens' preferences and desires [39,40]. In recent years, this method has been used to calculate the costs of RTIs [41][42][43][44]. In the present study, RTIs costs were estimated to be higher in studies that used the WTP method, compared with the HC approach.…”

Estimating Cost of Road Traffic Injuries in Iran Using Willingness to Pay (WTP) Method

“…Van speculated that the explanation for this effect was that income levels increase between 20 and 40 years old, but people are less afraid of dying at the age of 40 than they are at 20. Since children typically possess little money, their WTP is at the lowest rate [17] . The difference between the age of WTP in our study and others might be because of the greater job stability and higher income of people at age 35 than other ages; so, they declare a real amount of WTP.…”

Assessing the Impacts of Vehicle Emissions and Safety Regulations

“…In a CBA safety effects are generally expressed in monetary terms using the concept of the Value of a Statistical Life (VOSL), and values are generally based on the willingness to pay for higher safety levels. This tradition raises several ethical considerations, which are discussed in Van Wee and Rietveld (2013b).…”