Scale, Scope and Cognition: Context Analysis of Multiple Stated Choice Experiments on the Values of Life and Limb

In this paper we use data from an SP study on flood safety in the Netherlands, and elicit individual preferences for reduction of risk to life and limb. We perform context analysis to test the robustness of fatality risk valuation throughout choice experiments. The main interest of this paper is VOSL sensitivity to the valuation of correlated risks (scope effect). Besides, we explore the role of cognition on the stability of valuation across choice experiments using age and education. We pool data from multiple choice experiments and apply nested and mixed logit models in our analysis. We confirm statistically significant sensitivity to scope, comparing VOSL estimates for the test group in a choice experiment where correlated risks were present (risks of fatality, injury and evacuation) to an experiment where only fatality risk is valued. We find that the origin of differences in VOSL valuations across the choice experiments lies in differences in age and educational attainment, and may therefore be related to cognitive abilities of respondents. In particular, we conclude that higher VOSL sensitivity to scope is most prominently present among respondents of senior age (65 and older) and respondents without college education. This finding has important implications for discrete choice modeling and the use of obtained values in cost-benefit analyses

Composite Valuation of Immaterial Damage in Flooding: Value of Statistical Life, Value of Statistical Evacuation and Value of Statistical Injury

This paper enriches existing valuation literature in a number of ways by presenting context-specific estimates of immaterial damage. First, it offers an estimation of value of statistical life (VOSL) in the context of a natural hazard (flooding). Next, as one of the contributions, alongside with less biased estimate of VOSL (euro 6.8 mln) it also provides estimates of the value of statistical injury (VOSI, euro 92,000), and of the value of statistical evacuation (VOSE, euro 2,400). Our estimated indicators are plausible and stay robust throughout various estimations. For flood protection policy in the Netherlands, a higher value of VOSL forthcoming from this research would imply 'underprotection' under current conditions. Another important finding concerns the composition of the total value of immaterial damages, where value of fatalities or value of evacuation may dominate depending on the prevailing floor risk circumstances. This implies that, first, VOSL is not an adequate proxy for immaterial damages since it understates prospective benefits of designated protective measures. Second, spatially differentiated composition of immaterial damages should be explicitly considered to guide policy decisions

A Flood disaster in the Netherlands:a trade-off between paying for protection and undertaking action?

Effectively, one of the principal challenges for the Netherlands in the face of climate change is: How should we manage flood risk so that regional needs are adequately captured? Recent studies however point at the existing gap between risk perceptions of the public and the experts, which seems to become an apple of discord in the Dutch flood management. While public authorities are not willing to emphasize the growing threats that flooding are posing to the country, the issue is pressing hard to be addressed. In this paper we offer a summary of a recent study on flood risk perceptions in the Netherlands that precludes the findings regarding the willingness to pay for (public) measures contrasted to taking (individual) protective action. Clearly, arising debates around the issue of public-private (shared) responsibility in addressing flood risk add more fuel to the fire, where views seem to be polarized. We attempt thus to link this variation in behavioural intention to the willingness to pay for improvements in flood safety and explore the nature of this relationship. We observe in addition that regional differences do matter, which has direct implications for policy and practice. In particular, we suggest that measures tailored to serve local needs and attuned to local perceptions should prove to provide most feasible solutions

Major Disasters in Modern Economies: An Input-Output Based Approach at Modeling Imbalances and Disproportions

It seems that large-scale disasters are becoming an inevitable part of modern societies. Major calamities such as earthquakes, typhoons, and tsunamis are endangering the lives of many people and their possessions all over the world. Some of the most obvious questions to address are: How vulnerable are modern economies to extreme events? And: In which way should modern societies prepare themselves to deal with adversities on a grand scale? A disaster is a multi-faceted phenomenon. In this study, we concentrate on the economic aspects of a large-scale disaster. We address distinctions between direct and indirect costs, problems of double counting between stocks and flows, issues related to temporal and spatial dimensions and, more general, issues of preparedness (mitigation and adaptation) and response (resilience). We discuss modelling issues, and develop a special type of Input-Output model for addressing the major questions. We propose a three-step procedure in disaster policy. The first step consists of thinking about the remaining productive capacity after a major shock in a novel way; the second step involves strategic thinking about a return to equilibrium after a catastrophe; and the third one includes weighing ex-ante preparedness against expected costs. We position our approach against the background of recent developments in Dutch water management and policy, where we signal a change in thinking about flood threats. The country faces new dilemmas, and has to strike a balance between expected losses and future growth

Het is niet al goud wat blinkt:Eigen huis, eigen vermogen en eigen bijdragen aan de langdurige zorg

De eigen bijdragen voor langdurige zorg zijn in Nederland in de afgelopen jaren fors gestegen. Nadat sinds de jaren 1990 vooral het inkomen (inclusief dat uit vermogen) bepalend was voor de hoogte van de eigen bijdrage, telt nu ook het vermogen zelf weer mee als mogelijke financieringsbron daarvan. In dit NEA paper bekijken we welke personen meer zijn gaan betalen. Om dat na te gaan, maken we gebruik van een unieke koppeling van gegevens uit verschillende bronnen op individueel niveau. Onze conclusies zijn als volgt: hoewel eigen bijdragen aan de langdurige zorg een aantrekkelijke mogelijkheid lijken voor het inperken van groei in de zorguitgaven, is het niet al goud wat blinkt. Enerzijds komt dat omdat ouderen met een bovenmodaal inkomen veel minder gebruik maken van langdurige zorg vergeleken met ouderen met onder modaal inkomen. Dit betreft zowel zorg zonder verblijf (4 keer minder) als zorg met verblijf (6 keer minder). Daardoor dragen zorggebruikers die minder verdienen en die tot de ‘risicogroepen’ behoren, te weten eenpersoonshuishoudens en huurders, de zwaarste last van de totale uitgaven aan de langdurige zorg. Anderzijds zal de invoering van een extra vermogensbijtelling voor eigen bijdragen aan langdurige zorg vooral zorggebruikers met middeninkomens treffen maar geen hogere inkomensgroepen. De budgettaire opbrengst zal tegenvallen en de solidariteit tussen meer- en minderverdieners zal afnemen

Evaluating the Impact of Nature-Based Solutions: A Handbook for Practitioners

The Handbook aims to provide decision-makers with a comprehensive NBS impact assessment framework, and a robust set of indicators and methodologies to assess impacts of nature-based solutions across 12 societal challenge areas: Climate Resilience; Water Management; Natural and Climate Hazards; Green Space Management; Biodiversity; Air Quality; Place Regeneration; Knowledge and Social Capacity Building for Sustainable Urban Transformation; Participatory Planning and Governance; Social Justice and Social Cohesion; Health and Well-being; New Economic Opportunities and Green Jobs. Indicators have been developed collaboratively by representatives of 17 individual EU-funded NBS projects and collaborating institutions such as the EEA and JRC, as part of the European Taskforce for NBS Impact Assessment, with the four-fold objective of: serving as a reference for relevant EU policies and activities; orient urban practitioners in developing robust impact evaluation frameworks for nature-based solutions at different scales; expand upon the pioneering work of the EKLIPSE framework by providing a comprehensive set of indicators and methodologies; and build the European evidence base regarding NBS impacts. They reflect the state of the art in current scientific research on impacts of nature-based solutions and valid and standardized methods of assessment, as well as the state of play in urban implementation of evaluation frameworks

Review of economic valuation of nature based solutions in urban areas

Present report describes the Financial and Economic Value database (FEVD) collected during the first stage of the NATURVATION project. The FEVD includes monetary values of nature-based solutions together with respective sources and methods by which these values were obtained. The database and the report directly address the main objective of WP1 of the project of fostering learning and collaboration across different knowledge communities involved in the project and beyond, to develop a new analytical perspective on urban NBS. Nature-based solutions (NBS) are actions inspired by, supported by, or copied from nature; both using and enhancing existing solutions to challenges, as well as exploring more novel solutions (European Commission, 2015). They are positive responses to societal challenges, and can have the potential to simultaneously meet environmental, social and economic objectives. Essentially, NBS is an overarching concept that builds on, and supports, other closely related concepts, such as the ecosystem approach, ecosystem services, ecosystem-based adaptation and mitigation, green engineering and green and blue infrastructure. Conceptually, the report and the database hinge on a common transdisciplinary framework that has been established within the NATURVATION project to categorise NBS in various domains (e.g. ecological and landscape domains), and in accordance with an ecosystem service classification. This framework is also used to compile the FEVD, which aims to link monetary values to these classifications and service indicators as much as possible. The sources include academic papers published on economic valuation of NBS in the last 40 years. The FEVD includes 205 value entries for NBS originating from 105 studies with a broad geographical coverage. It covers both revealed preference (RP) and stated preference (SP) methods, and include values elicited by means of contingent valuation and choice modelling (SP), as well as hedonic pricing and benefit transfer methods (RP)

Can Protection Motivation Theory predict pro-environmental behavior? Explaining the adoption of electric vehicles in the Netherlands

Scholars have proposed that the Protection Motivation Theory provides a valuable framework to explain pro-environmental choices, by employing a wide set of predictors, such as the costs and benefits of current (maladaptive) behavior as well as prospective adaptive behavior. However, no comprehensive empirical tests of the Protection Motivation Theory in the slow onset environmental risk domain have been published yet to our knowledge. This paper aims at closing this gap. We first conceptualized the Protection Motivation Theory for the use in this environmental domain. Next, we present results of a questionnaire study among a large representative sample of Dutch drivers that showed that the Protection Motivation Theory is a relevant theory for modeling different indicators of full electric vehicle adoption. Notably, all theoretical antecedents proved to be significant predictors of different adoption indicators. Respondents were particularly more likely to adopt an electric vehicle when they perceived the negative consequences caused by conventional vehicles as more severe, and when they expected electric vehicles to decrease these consequences. The most important barriers for electric vehicle adoption were perceived high monetary and non-monetary costs of electric vehicles, and benefits associated with the use of a conventional vehicle. Interestingly, we found that environmental risks are more prominent in predicting close adoption indicators; while energy security risks are more prominent in predicting distant adoption indicators. As expected, our findings suggest that both collective concerns and individual concerns predict different indicators of adoption. Individual concerns (in particular perceived costs of driving an electric vehicle) played a more prominent role when predicting close measures of adoption, while collective concerns (e.g., perceived severity of environmental and energy security risks) played a somewhat more prominent role when predicting distant measures of adoption. Implications for research and practice are provided