What Affects the Quality of Economic Analysis for Life‐Saving Investments?‡

Economic analysis of life-saving investments in both the public and private sectors has the potential to dramatically improve longevity and the quality of life, but only if the analyses on which decisions are based are done well. In this article, we analyze a data set that provides information on the content and quality of journal articles that measure the cost-effectiveness of life-saving investments. Our study is the first to provide a detailed multivariate analysis of factors affecting objective measures of quality. We also explore whether a series of recommendations by an expert panel convened by the U.S. Public Health Service affect the way analyses of specific life-saving investments are done. Our results suggest that four factors are positively correlated with an index we construct to measure analytical quality: (1) having at least one author affiliated with a university, (2) publication in a journal that has experience in publishing these analyses, (3) if the life-saving investment is located in the United States, and (4) if the analysis considers a measure of social costs or benefits. Somewhat surprisingly, a study's funding source and whether it is affiliated with industry are not significantly correlated with the quality index. Finally, neither time nor the panel guidelines had an impact on the index.     

Cost‐Effective Application of Thermal Protection on LPG Road Transport Tanks for Risk Reduction Due to Hot BLEVE Incidents

A simplified risk and cost‐benefit analysis is presented for the application of thermal protection (TP) on propane and LPG highway tanker trucks operating in North America. A risk analysis is performed to determine the benefits of risk reduction by TP, relative to the costs of applying and maintaining TP on a tanker truck. The results show that TP is cost effective if the tanker truck spends enough time (or travels enough distance) in areas of moderate or high population density. The analysis is very sensitive to a number of inputs, including: (i) value of life, (ii) hot boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion frequency, (iii) public exposure to severe hazards, and (iv) life cost of TP. With this simplified analysis, it is possible to generate tanker truck exposure times to the public that justify the application of TP based on cost and benefit considerations.     

Health‐Economics Analyses Applied to ELF Electric and Magnetic Fields

Extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fields (ELF EMFs) are a common exposure for modern populations. The prevailing public‐health protection paradigm is that quantitative exposure limits are based on the established acute effects, whereas the possible chronic effects are considered too uncertain for quantitative limits, but might justify precautionary measures. The choice of precautionary measures can be informed by a health‐economics analysis (HEA). We consider four such analyses of precautionary measures that have been conducted at a national or state level in California, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Israel. We describe the context of each analysis, examine how they deal with some of the more significant issues that arise, and present a comparison of the input parameters and assumptions used. The four HEAs are methodologically similar. The most significant qualitative choices that have to be made are what dose‐response relationship to assume, what allowance if any to make for uncertainty, and, for a CBA only, what diseases to consider, and all four analyses made similar choices. These analyses suggest that, on the assumptions made, there are some low‐cost measures, such as rephasing, that can be applied to transmission in some circumstances and that can be justifiable in cost‐benefit terms, but that higher cost measures, such as undergrounding, become unjustifiable. Of the four HEAs, those in the United Kingdom and Israel were influential in determining the country's EMF policy. In California and Netherlands, the HEA may well have informed the debate, but the policy chosen did not stem directly from the HEA.     

Review of Regulatory Emphasis on Transportation Safety in the United States, 2002–2009: Public versus Private Modes

The U.S. Department of Transportation is responsible for implementing new safety improvements and regulations with the goal of ensuring limited funds are distributed to where they can have the greatest impact on safety. In this work, we conduct a study of new regulations and other reactions (such as recalls) to fatal accidents in several different modes of transportation implemented from 2002 to 2009. We find that in the safest modes of commercial aviation and bus transport, the amount of spending on new regulations is high in relation to the number of fatalities compared to the regulatory attention received by less safe modes of general aviation and private automobiles. Additionally, we study two major fatal accident investigations from commercial aviation and two major automotive recalls associated with fatal accidents. We find differences in the cost per expected fatality prevented for these reactions, with the airline accident investigations being more cost effective. Overall, we observe trends in both the automotive and aviation sectors that suggest that public transportation receives more regulatory attention than private transport. We also observe that the types of safety remedies utilized, regulation versus investigation, have varying levels of effectiveness in different transport modes. We suggest that these differences are indicative of increased public demand for safety in modes where a third party may be held responsible, even for those not participating in the transportation. These findings have important implications for the transportation industry, policymakers, and for estimating the public demand for safety in new transport modes.     

Modeling the Cost Effectiveness of Fire Protection Resource Allocation in the United States: Models and a 1980–2014 Case Study

The estimated cost of fire in the United States is about $329 billion a year, yet there are gaps in the literature to measure the effectiveness of investment and to allocate resources optimally in fire protection. This article fills these gaps by creating data‐driven empirical and theoretical models to study the effectiveness of nationwide fire protection investment in reducing economic and human losses. The regression between investment and loss vulnerability shows high R² values (≈0.93). This article also contributes to the literature by modeling strategic (national‐level or state‐level) resource allocation (RA) for fire protection with equity‐efficiency trade‐off considerations, while existing literature focuses on operational‐level RA. This model and its numerical analyses provide techniques and insights to aid the strategic decision‐making process. The results from this model are used to calculate fire risk scores for various geographic regions, which can be used as an indicator of fire risk. A case study of federal fire grant allocation is used to validate and show the utility of the optimal RA model. The results also identify potential underinvestment and overinvestment in fire protection in certain regions. This article presents scenarios in which the model presented outperforms the existing RA scheme, when compared in terms of the correlation of resources allocated with actual number of fire incidents. This article provides some novel insights to policymakers and analysts in fire protection and safety that would help in mitigating economic costs and saving lives.     

Decisions,Science, and Values: Crafting Regulatory Alternatives Analysis

Emerging “prevention‐based” approaches to chemical regulation seek to minimize the use of toxic chemicals by mandating or directly incentivizing the adoption of viable safer alternative chemicals or processes. California and Maine are beginning to implement such programs, requiring manufacturers of consumer products containing certain chemicals of concern to identify and evaluate potential safer alternatives. In the European Union, the REACH program imposes similar obligations on manufacturers of certain substances of very high concern. Effective prevention‐based regulation requires regulatory alternatives analysis (RAA), a methodology for comparing and evaluating the regulated chemical or process and its alternatives across a range of relevant criteria. RAA has both public and private dimensions. To a significant degree, alternatives analysis is an aspect of product design; that is, the process by which private industry designs the goods it sells. Accordingly, an RAA method should reflect the attributes of well‐crafted product design tools used by businesses. But RAA adds health and environmental objectives to the mix of concerns taken into account by the product designer. Moreover, as part of a prevention‐based regulatory regime, it implicates important public values such as legitimacy, equity, public engagement, and accountability. Thus, an RAA should reflect both private standards and public values, and be evaluated against them. This article adopts that perspective, identifying an integrated set of design principles for RAA, and illustrating the application of those principles.     

Real options valuation principle in the multi-period base-stock problem

This paper analyzes the multi-period base-stock problem where there is a financial risk associated with a stochastic demand. For the single-period problem, it is known that the optimal inventory policy can be obtained with the Black and Scholes option pricing formula. This paper pushes the analysis further by applying the options valuation framework to the multi-period problem and presenting an algorithm for finding the optimal inventory policy. A computational study indicates that the effect of systematic risk is typically negligible (as for the single-period problem). Therefore, it can be concluded that systematic risk in demand is of little importance for optimal inventory control.     

Manufacturing strategies and financial performance—The effect of advanced information technology: CAD/CAM systems

Nowadays, the business environment is characterized by great uncertainty and variability. In this environment, information technology (IT) has proved to be an important strategic ingredient for the creation of competitive advantage. This role of IT has been widely accepted during the past few years [Feeny D. Creating and sustaining competitive advantage with IT. In: Earl M, editor. Information management the strategic direction. Oxford, 1990; Ives B. Wingtip Courriers, Southern Methodist University Case Study #SMY/MIS/90-01, Edwin L. Cox School of Business, Dallas, TX, January 1990].     

Real option games with R&D and learning spillovers

We demonstrate to decision makers how to optimally make costly strategic pre-investment R&D decisions in the presence of spillover effects in an option pricing framework with analytic tractability. Decisions are modeled as impulse-type controls with random outcome. Two firms face two decisions that are solved interdependently in a two-stage game. The first-stage decision is: What is the optimal level of coordination (optimal policy/technology choice)? The second-stage decision is: What is the optimal effort for a given level of the spillover effects and the cost of information acquisition? The framework is extended to a two-period closed-loop stochastic game with (path-dependency inducing) switching costs that make strategy revisions harder. When conditions of learning-by-doing exist, we find that strategy shifts are easier to observe in market environments of high growth and high volatility.     

Behavioral Economics and Regulatory Analysis

Behavioral economics has captured the interest of scholars and the general public by demonstrating ways in which individuals make decisions that appear irrational. While increasing attention is being focused on the implications of this research for the design of risk‐reducing policies, less attention has been paid to how it affects the economic valuation of policy consequences. This article considers the latter issue, reviewing the behavioral economics literature and discussing its implications for the conduct of benefit‐cost analysis, particularly in the context of environmental, health, and safety regulations. We explore three concerns: using estimates of willingness to pay or willingness to accept compensation for valuation, considering the psychological aspects of risk when valuing mortality‐risk reductions, and discounting future consequences. In each case, we take the perspective that analysts should avoid making judgments about whether values are “rational” or “irrational.” Instead, they should make every effort to rely on well‐designed studies, using ranges, sensitivity analysis, or probabilistic modeling to reflect uncertainty. More generally, behavioral research has led some to argue for a more paternalistic approach to policy analysis. We argue instead for continued focus on describing the preferences of those affected, while working to ensure that these preferences are based on knowledge and careful reflection.     

The quality and use of regulatory analysis in 2008

This article assesses the quality and apparent use of regulatory analysis for economically significant regulations proposed by federal agencies in 2008. A nine-member research team used a six-point (0-5) scale to evaluate regulatory analyses according to criteria drawn from Executive Order 12866 and Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4. Principal findings include: (1) the average quality of regulatory analysis, though not high, is somewhat better than previous regulatory scorecards have shown; (2) quality varies widely; (3) biggest strengths are accessibility and clarity; (4) biggest weaknesses are analysis of the systemic problem and retrospective analysis; (5) budget or "transfer" regulations usually receive low-quality analysis; (6) a minority of the regulations contain evidence that the agency used the analysis in significant decisions; (7) quality of analysis is positively correlated with the apparent use of the analysis in regulatory decisions; and (8) greater diffusion of best practices could significantly improve the overall quality of regulatory analysis.     

On Weighing Gains and Investments at the Margin of Risk Regulation

Analysts have long noted an apparent discrepancy in the level of investment seemingly necessary to meet "acceptable" levels of public safety. At the margin of risk regulation, i.e., where safety determination is judged acceptable, the traditional cost-benefit calculus appears to contribute obvious rationale to the final political decision. Efforts are now being made to introduce a measure of consistency into the application of risk-cost benefit analysis to radiological protection. This paper reviews these efforts from a UK perspective. It also looks at how the issue was treated in a public setting through the Sizewell B Public Inquiry.     

Decision Making for Group Risk Reduction: Dealing with Epistemic Uncertainty

Group risk is usually represented by FN curves showing the frequency of different accident sizes for a given activity. Many governments regulate group risk through FN criterion lines, which define the tolerable location of an FN curve. However, to compare different risk reduction alternatives, one must be able to rank FN curves. The two main problems in doing this are that the FN curve contains multiple frequencies, and that there are usually large epistemic uncertainties about the curve. Since the mid 1970s, a number of authors have used the concept of “disutility” to summarize FN curves in which a family of disutility functions was defined with a single parameter controlling the degree of “risk aversion.” Here, we show it to be risk neutral, disaster averse, and insensitive to epistemic uncertainty on accident frequencies. A new approach is outlined that has a number of attractive properties. The formulation allows us to distinguish between risk aversion and disaster aversion, two concepts that have been confused in the literature until now. A two‐parameter family of disutilities generalizing the previous approach is defined, where one parameter controls risk aversion and the other disaster aversion. The family is sensitive to epistemic uncertainties. Such disutilities may, for example, be used to compare the impact of system design changes on group risks, or might form the basis for valuing reductions in group risk in a cost‐benefit analysis.     

The ethical dilemmas of risky decisions

Even in a pandemic there seem to be inherent conflicts of interest between the individual and societal consequences of remedial actions and strategies. Actions taken in the sole interests of patients, as required by the Hippocratic oath, can have broadly inconvenient economic implications for the State. (“Average” benefits for a population can impose individual inconveniences for the vulnerable.). Understandably these decisions are not normally made explicitly and transparently by governments. This leads to seemingly illogical and inhumane strategies which are not understood and hence mistrusted and often ignored by the public. Vaccination sentiments on social media are often an unwanted symptom of this dilemma. This article outlines and discusses a number of examples of such situations with a focus on ethical aspects. It concludes that each case must be considered individually as to the issues that need to be weighed in these difficult decisions; and that there are no clear and universally acceptable ethical solutions. What can be learned from the COVID-19 crisis is that short term utilitarianism has consequences that in the eyes of the population are unacceptable. This lesson seems equally valid for cost benefit evaluations regarding other risks, such as from hazardous industries, flood defenses, and air transport. Decisionmakers and politicians can learn that persuasion only goes so far. In the end the people appear to prioritize in terms of deontology.     

An Approach for Optimal Allocation of Safety Resources: Using the Knapsack Problem to Take Aggregated Cost‐Efficient Preventive Measures

On the basis of the combination of the well‐known knapsack problem and a widely used risk management technique in organizations (that is, the risk matrix), an approach was developed to carry out a cost‐benefits analysis to efficiently take prevention investment decisions. Using the knapsack problem as a model and combining it with a well‐known technique to solve this problem, bundles of prevention measures are prioritized based on their costs and benefits within a predefined prevention budget. Those bundles showing the highest efficiencies, and within a given budget, are identified from a wide variety of possible alternatives. Hence, the approach allows for an optimal allocation of safety resources, does not require any highly specialized information, and can therefore easily be applied by any organization using the risk matrix as a risk ranking tool.     

Terrorism Risks and Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Aviation Security

We evaluate, for the U.S. case, the costs and benefits of three security measures designed to reduce the likelihood of a direct replication of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. To do so, we assess risk reduction, losses, and security costs in the context of the full set of security layers. The three measures evaluated are installed physical secondary barriers (IPSB) to restrict access to the hardened cockpit door during door transitions, the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS), and the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) Program. In the process, we examine an alternate policy measure: doubling the budget of the FFDO program to $44 million per year, installing IPSBs in all U.S. aircraft at a cost of $13.5 million per year, and reducing funding for FAMS by 75% to $300 million per year. A break‐even cost‐benefit analysis then finds the minimum probability of an otherwise successful attack required for the benefit of each security measures to equal its cost. We find that the IPSB is costeffective if the annual attack probability of an otherwise successful attack exceeds 0.5% or one attack every 200 years. The FFDO program is costeffective if the annual attack probability exceeds 2%. On the other hand, more than two otherwise successful attacks per year are required for FAMS to be costeffective. A policy that includes IPSBs, an increased budget for FFDOs, and a reduced budget for FAMS may be a viable policy alternative, potentially saving hundreds of millions of dollars per year with consequences for security that are, at most, negligible.     

Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Passive Fire Protections in Road LPG Transportation

The cost‐benefit evaluation of passive fire protection adoption in the road transport of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) was investigated. In a previous study, mathematical simulations of real scale fire scenarios proved the effectiveness of passive fire protections in preventing the “fired” boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE), thus providing a significant risk reduction. In the present study the economical aspects of the adoption of fire protections are analyzed and an approach to cost‐benefit analysis (CBA) is proposed. The CBA model is based on the comparison of the risk reduction due to fire protections (expressed in monetary terms by the value of a statistical life) and the cost of the application of fire protections to a fleet of tankers. Different types of fire protections were considered, as well as the possibility to apply protections to the entire fleet or only to a part of it. The application of the proposed model to a real‐life case study is presented and discussed. Results demonstrate that the adoption of passive fire protections on road tankers, though not compulsory in Europe, can be economically feasible, thus representing a concrete measure to achieve control of the “major hazard accidents” cited by the European legislation.     

Consumer Responses to Integrated Risk‐Benefit Information Associated with the Consumption of Food

The risk analysis of the health impact of foods is increasingly focused on integrated risk‐benefit assessment, which will also need to be communicated to consumers. It therefore becomes important to understand how consumers respond to integrated risk‐benefit information. Quality‐adjusted‐life‐years (QALYs) is one measure that can be used to assess the balance between risks and benefits associated with a particular food. The effectiveness of QALYs for communicating both positive and negative health effects associated with food consumption to consumers was examined, using a 3 × 2 experiment varying information about health changes in terms of QALYs associated with the consumption of fish (n = 325). The effect of this information on consumer perceptions of the usefulness of QALYs for describing health effects, on risk and benefit perceptions, attitudes, and intentions to consume fish was examined. Results demonstrated that consumers perceived QALYs as useful for communicating health effects associated with food consumption. QALYs communicated as a net effect were preferred for food products associated with negative net effects on health, while separate communication of both risks and benefits may be preferred for food products associated with positive or zero net health effects. Information about health changes in terms of QALYs facilitated informed decision making by consumers, as indicated by the impact on risk and benefit perceptions as intended by the information. The impact of this information on actual food consumption choices merits further investigation.