Preferences for lives, injuries, and age: a stated preference survey

Area of Science:

• Public Health
• Environmental Economics
• Risk Analysis

Background:

• Cost-benefit analyses for risk reduction projects often face ethical dilemmas regarding the valuation of human lives.
• Decisions on resource allocation for safety improvements may implicitly or explicitly consider age-related life values, raising public acceptance concerns.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate public preferences in Sweden regarding the influence of age groups on the perceived benefits of life-saving interventions.
• To compare the public's valuation of fatalities and serious injuries across different age demographics and accident types.

Main Methods:

• A choice experiment was designed with Swedish participants making pair-wise decisions.
• Choices involved varying accident types (fire, traffic), number of fatalities/injuries averted, and age groups of individuals saved (5-15, 35-45, 65-75 years).

Main Results:

• Avoiding one fatality in the 5-15 age group was equivalent to 1.4 fatalities in the 35-45 group and 3.3 fatalities in the 65-75 group.
• No significant differences in valuation were found based on accident type (fire vs. traffic).
• One fatality averted was valued approximately 3.5 times more than one serious injury averted, differing from the official Swedish Road Administration value of 6.

Conclusions:

• Public preferences indicate a higher value placed on saving younger lives compared to older lives in Sweden.
• The findings suggest a need to reconsider current official valuation methods in cost-benefit analyses for risk reduction projects to align with public perception.
• Valuation of serious injuries relative to fatalities may also require adjustment based on public preferences.