| 1. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Are people inequality averse or just risk averse?
- 2001
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Individuals' preferences for risk and inequality are measured through experimental choices between hypothetical societies and lotteries. The median relative risk aversion, which is often seen to reflect social inequality aversion, is between 2 and 3. We also estimate the individual inequality aversion, reflecting individuals' willingness to pay for living in a more equal society.Left-wing voters and women are both more risk- and inequality averse than others. The model allows for non-monotonic SWFs, implying that welfare may decrease with an individual's income at high income levels. This is illustrated in simulations based on the empirical results.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Do administrators have the same priorities for risk reductions as the general public?
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0895-5646 .- 1573-0476. ; 45:1, s. 79-95
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A stated preference survey was used to investigate the potential discrepancy between the priorities of public administrators and the general public regarding risk reductions. Both groups of respondents were asked to assume the role of a public policy-maker and choose between different public safety projects. We investigate differences in three areas: (i) large vs. small accidents, (ii) actual vs. subjective risk, and (iii) the trade-off between avoiding fatalities and serious injuries for different age groups and accidents. We find only minor differences between the responses of administrators and the general public, the most important of which is the difference in priorities between reducing the risk of many small or one large accident. In this area the most common response from the general public is that they prefer avoiding many small accidents rather than one large accident while among the administrators there is almost an equal split between the two options.
|
|
| 5. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?
- 2008
-
Rapport (refereegranskat)abstract
- We design a donations vs. own money choice experiment comparing three differenttreatments. In two of the treatments the pay-offs are hypothetical. In the first of these, a shortcheap talk script was used, and subjects were required to state their own preferences in thisscenario. In the second, subjects were asked to state how they believed an average studentwould respond to the choices. In the third treatment the pay-offs were real, allowing us to usethe results to compare the validity of the two hypothetical treatments. We find a stronghypothetical bias in both hypothetical treatments where the marginal willingness to pay fordonations are higher when subjects state their own preferences but lower when subjects statewhat they believe are other students preferences. The explanation is probably a self-imageeffect in both cases. We find that it is mainly women who are prone to hypothetical bias inthis study
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Carlsson, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Value of statistical life and cause of accident: A choice experiment
- 2008
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The results from this study are used to compare the marginal willingness to pay for risk reductions and calculate corresponding values of statistical life for road, fire and drowning accidents in Sweden. The values were estimated using a mail survey with 5200 respondents where each respondent was required to answer nine different dichotomous willingness to pay questions which were varied according to accident type, base line risk, risk reduction and cost. The risk reductions were expressed as mortality risk for adult Swedes. The questionnaire also contained socioeconomic and risk related questions. We find that - Women are more likely to take actions in order to reduce their mortality risk. - Older respondents are more likely to take actions in order to reduce their risk of dying by fire and road accidents, but not drowning. - Respondents who live in apartment blocks are less likely to take actions to reduce their mortality risk. - Respondents who have had a previous bad experience with road accidents are more likely to take mortality risk reducing actions. - Respondents who found the valuation questions easy to answer are more likely to take actions. Using results from at probit regression model we find the value of statistical life for road accidents to be 20.2 million Swedish kronor (⬠2.2 million), 13.3 million kronor (⬠1.4 million) for fire accidents, and 12.4 million kronor (⬠1.3 million) for drowning accidents. Our results therefore suggest that different values should be used in a cost-benefit framework depending on the accident type. The value of statistical life for road accidents is within the span of other Swedish estimates where several studies using contingent valuation methods with WTP-questions have arrived at values between 17 and 24 million Swedish kronor (Persson et al, 1996; Persson et al, 2001; Hultkrantz et al, 2006; Svensson, 2007). Further comparison is not possible because we are unaware of any other studies that estimate the value of statistical life using WTP-questions for fire and drowning accidents. The respondents were also asked whether they believed they could affect the level of risk and also questioned on the extent of their concern regarding the different types of accidents. The responses indicate that while subjects believe that they can affect the risk levels of all three accident types, they believe that they can control the risk for road accidents to a lesser extent for road accidents than for the others. Similarly, although subjects do not worry about the mortality risks to any large extent, there is a clear difference between road accidents and the other causes. It may be the case that these two factors cause the differences in value of statistical life estimates for road accidents on one hand and fire and drowning accidents on the other hand. The results that subjective beliefs of the risk such as dread and voluntariness influences the value of statistical life is in line with suggestions by Slovic (1987), Savage (1993) and Chilton et al (2006)
|
|
| 8. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Value of statistical life and cause of accident: A choice experiment
- 2008
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The purpose of this study is to compare value of statistical life (VSL) estimates for traffic, drowning and fire accidents. Using a choice experiment in a mail survey of 5000 Swedish respondents we estimated the willingness to pay for risk reductions in the three accidents. In the experiment respondents were asked in a series of questions, whether they would choose risk reducing investments where type of accident, cost of the investment, the risk reduction acquired, and the baseline risk varied between questions. The VSLs for fire and drowning accidents were found to be about 1/3 lower than that for traffic accidents. Although respondents worry more about traffic accidents, this alone cannot explain the difference in VSL estimates. The difference between fire and drowning accidents was not found to be statistically significant.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
