Valuation of morbidity and mortality risk reductions. Does context matter?

Abstract

The main research purpose of the present study was to test for any differences in the valuation of morbidity and mortality risk reductions across two contexts; traffic and health. A contingent valuation study on preferences for morbidity and mortality risk was carried out in Denmark in 2007. Respondents were randomised into two different arms: one arm in which the valuation took place in the context of health and another arm in which the context was traffic. In both contexts, the inferior health state was described by way of the standardized EQ-5D descriptive system. We obtained a total sample of 520 respondents from an online database. In the present study we found clear evidence of a context effect on expressed valuations of identical risk reductions. This was true irrespective of whether the adverse outcome in question was death or inferior health. This result suggests that interventions targeting risks of death or risks of ill health should not necessarily be valued equally across sectors. From a welfare economic perspective, the use of the same estimates across contexts – and especially across sectors – could be misleading and in worst case lead to inefficient resource allocations.