Economic implications of hormesis

Human and Experimental Toxicology

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 267-278

  Hammitt, James K ^a  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Hormesis; Market mechanism; Public policy; Regulation; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST CONTROL; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HORMESIS; HUMAN; LINEAR SYSTEM; MODEL; POPULATION EXPOSURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; HUMANS; NO-OBSERVED-ADVERSE-EFFECT LEVEL; PUBLIC POLICY; RISK MANAGEMENT; XENOBIOTICS;

EID: 4043142837     PISSN: 09603271     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1191/0960327104ht447oa     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. Hormesis: u-shaped dose responses and their centrality in toxicology. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2001; 22: 285-91.
2. Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. U-shaped dose-responses in biology, toxicology, and public health. Annu Rev Public Health 2001; 22: 15-33.
3. Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. Applications of hormesis in toxicology risk assessment and chemotherapeutics. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2002; 23: 331-37.
4. Hammitt JK. Valuing mortality risk: theory and practice. Environ Sci Technol 2000; 34: 1396-400.
5. Freeman AM III. The Measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods, second edition. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 2003.
6. Viscusi WK, Aldy JE. The value of a statistical life: a critical review of market estimates throughout the world. J Risk Uncertainty 2003; 27: 5-76.
7. Graham JD, Wiener JB. Risk v. risk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.
8. Hammitt JK. Evaluating contingent valuation of environmental health risks: the proportionality test. Assoc Environ Resource Economists Newsl 2000; 20: 14-19.
9. Corso PS, Hammitt JK, Graham JD. Valuing mortality-risk reduction: using visual aids to improve the validity of contingent valuation. J Risk Uncertainty 2001; 23: 165-84.
10. Cross FB. Legal implications of hormesis. BELLE Newsl. 9 and Hum Exp Toxicol 2001; 20: 122-28.
11. Raiffa H. Decision analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1968.
12. Clemen RT. Making hard decisions, second edition. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press, 1996.
13. Pliskin JS, Shepard DS, Weinstein MC. Utility functions for life years and health status. Oper Res 1980; 28: 206-24.
14. Bleichrodt H, Wakker P, Johannesson M. Characterizing QALYs by risk neutrality. J Risk Uncertainty 1997; 15: 107-14.
15. Hammitt JK. QALYs versus WTP. Risk Anal 2002; 22: 985-1001.
16. Weitzman ML. Prices vs. quantities. Rev Econ Studies 1974; 41: 477-91.
17. Kimball MS. Precautionary saving in the small and in the large. Econometrica 1990; 58: 53-73.
18. Rawls J. A Theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
19. Stokey E, Zeckhauser RJ. A primer for policy analysis. New York, NY: Norton, 1978.
20. Hanley N, Shogren JF, White B. Environmental economics in theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
21. Lesser JA, Dodds DE, Zerbe RO Jr. Environmental economics and policy. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1997.
22. Milliman SR, Prince R. Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control. J Environ Econ Manag 1989; 17: 247-65.