A conceptual approach to the estimation of societal willingness-to-pay for nuclear safety programs

Nuclear Engineering and Design

Volumn 224, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 65-77

  Pandey, M D ^a   Nathwani, J S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b Hydro One Inc   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION THEORY; HEALTH CARE; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; NUCLEAR REACTORS;

NUCLEAR SAFETY PROGRAMS;

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING;

EID: 0042127192     PISSN: 00295493     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0029-5493(03)00062-1     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Arthur W.B. The economics of risks to life. Am. Econ. Rev. 71(1):1980;54-64.
2. Bleichrodt H., Wakker P., Johannesson M. Characterizing QALYs by risk neutrality. J. Risk Uncertainty. 15:1997;107-114.
3. Canada, 1995. Government of Canada Regulatory Policy. Treasury Board Secretariat, pp. 1-2.
4. Cohen B.L. Catalog of risks extended and updated. Health Phys. 61(3):1991;317-335.
5. Conley B.C. The value of human life in demand for safety. Am. Econ. Rev. 66(1):1976;45-55.
6. Fraser, P.M., 1988. A review of the design related aspects of the safety of Ontario Hydro's nuclear generating stations. In: Ontario Nuclear Safety Review, vol. 2: Appendices. Toronto, Ont., pp. 2.1-2.154.
7. Gulis G. Life expectancy as an indicator of environmental health. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 16:2000;161-165.
8. Hicks J.R. The foundation of welfare economics. Econ. J. 49(196):1939;696-712.
9. Hoegberg L. Risk perception, safety goals and regulatory decision making. Reliability Eng. Syst. Safety. 59:1998;135-139.
10. Keyfitz, N., 1985. Applied Mathematical Demography. Springer, New York.
11. Kroger W., Fischer P.U. Balancing safety and economics. Nucl. Eng. Des. 195:2000;101-108.
12. Krupnick, A.J., Alberini, A., Cropper, M., Simon, N., O'Brien, B., Goeree, R., Heintzelman, M., 2000. Age, health and willingness-to-pay for mortality risk reduction. Discussion Paper, Resources for Future, DP00-37, Washington, DC.
13. Lutter R., Morrall J.F., Viscusi W.K. The cost-per-life-saved cutoff for safety-enhancing regulations. Econ. Inq. 37(4):1999;599-608.
14. Nathwani J.S., Narveson J. Three principles for managing risk in the public interest. Risk Anal. 15(6):1995;615-626.
15. Nathwani, J.S., Lind, N.C., Pandey, M.D., 1997. Affordable Safety by Choice: The Life Quality Method. Institute for Risk Research, University of Waterloo, Canada, p. 230.
16. National Academy of Sciences, 1990. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR V). National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
17. Nordhaus, W.D., 1997. The Swedish Nuclear Dilemma: Energy and the Environment. Resources for the Future. Washington, DC, p. 167.
18. O'Donnell E.P., Mauro J.J. A cost benefit analysis of nuclear safety and nonnuclear health and safety protective measures and regulations. Nucl. Safety. 20(5):1979;525-540.
19. Ontario Hydro, 1987. Darlington NGS Probabilistic Safety Evaluation: Summary Report. Nuclear Safety and Studies Department, Ontario Hydro, Toronto, Ont.
20. Ontario Hydro, 1988a. The Safety of Ontario's Nuclear Power Reactors: A Scientific and Technical Review. Chapter 17: Costs of Nuclear Safety, vol. 1. Ontario Nuclear Safety Review. Toronto, Ont.
21. Ontario Hydro, 1988b. The Safety of Ontario's Nuclear Power Reactors: A Scientific and Technical Review. Section 1: Management of Nuclear Safety in Ontario Hydro, vol. 1. Ontario Nuclear Safety Review. Toronto, Ont.
22. Pauly, M.V., 1996. Valuing health care benefits in money terms. In: Sloan, F.A. (Ed.), Valuing Health Care: Costs, Benefits, and Effectiveness of Pharmaceuticals and Other Medical Technologies. Cambridge University Press, UK, pp. 99-124.
23. Pliskin J.S., Shepard D.S., Weinstein M.C. Utility functions for life years and health status. J. Operations Res. 28(1):1980;206-224.
24. Pratt J.W. Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica. 32(1/2):1964;122-136.
25. Rackwitz R. Optimization and risk acceptability based on the Life Quality Index. J. Struct. Safety. 24(2-4):2002;297-331.
26. Rackwitz, R., 2002. A rational risk acceptability criterion based on the Life Quality Index. Invited keynote lecture, OMAE-Conference, 2002, Oslo.
27. Shepard D.S., Zechhauser R.J. Survival vs. consumption. Manag. Sci. 30(4):1984;423-439.
28. Skinner J. Variable life span and the interntemporal elasticity of consumption. Rev. Econ. Stat. 67(4):1985;616-623.
29. Skjong, R., Ronold, K.O., 2002. So much for safety. In: Proceedings of OMAE 2002, Paper 28451, Oslo, Norway, June 23-28, 2002.
30. Statistics Canada, 1995. Life Tables, Canada and Provinces, 1990-1992. Catalogue 84-537, Ottawa, Ont.
31. Tengs T.O., Adams M.E., Pliskin J.S., Safran D.G., Siegel J.E., Weinstein M.C., Graham J.D. Five hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Anal. 15(3):1995;369-390.
32. The Royal Society of Canada, 2001. Report of an Expert Panel to Review the Socio-Economic Models and Related Components Supporting the Development of Canada Wide Standards for Particulate Matter and Ozone.
33. United Nations Development Program, 1990. The Human Development Report. Oxford University Press, UK.
34. Usher, D., 1973. An imputation to the measure of economic growth for changes in life expectancy. Published in National Accounting and Economic Theory: The Collected Papers of Dan Usher, vol. 1. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., UK, pp. 105-144.
35. Viscusi, W.K., 1996. Discounting health effects for medical decision. In: Sloan, F.A. (Ed.), Valuing Health Care: Costs, Benefits, and Effectiveness of Pharmaceuticals and Other Medical Technologies. Cambridge University Press, UK, pp. 125-147.
36. Yaari M.E. Uncertain lifetime, life insurance, and the theory of the consumer. Rev. Econ. Studies. 32(2):1965;137-150.
37. Zeckhauser R. Time as the ultimate source of utility. Q. J. Econ. 87(4):1973;668-675.