Revealed preference

揭示偏好
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    OBJECTIVE: To systematically review studies eliciting monetary value of a statistical life (VSL) estimates within, and across, different sectors and other contexts; compare the reported estimates; and critically review the elicitation methods used.
    METHODS: In June 2019, we searched the following databases to identify methodological and empirical studies: Cochrane Library, Compendex, Embase, Environment Complete, Informit, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for reporting and a modified Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist to assess the quality of included studies.
    RESULTS: We identified 1455 studies, of which we included 120 in the systematic review. A stated-preference approach was used in 76 articles, with 51%, 41%, and 8% being contingent valuation studies, discrete-choice experiments, or both, respectively. A revealed-preference approach was used in 43 articles, of which 74% were based on compensating-wage differentials. The human capital approach was used in only 1 article. We assessed most publications (87%) as being of high quality. Estimates for VSL varied substantially by context (sector, developed/developing country, socio-economic status, etc), with the median of midpoint purchasing power parity-adjusted estimates of 2019 US$5.7 million ($6.8 million, $8.7 million, and $5.3 million for health, labor market, and transportation safety sectors, respectively).
    CONCLUSIONS: The large variation observed in published VSLs depends mainly on the context rather than the method used. We found higher median values for labor markets and developed countries. It is important that health economists and policymakers use context-specific VSL estimates. Methodological innovation and standardization are needed to maximize comparability of VSL estimates within, and across, sectors and methods.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    促进实用自行车使用的一个基本方面是对建筑环境进行修改以提高安全性,骑自行车的效率和乐趣。关于自行车路线选择的公开偏好数据可以极大地帮助理解高度异构用户群体的实际行为,这反过来有助于确定基础设施或其他建筑环境计划的优先级。本系统综述旨在比较评估骑自行车者全程路线选择的经验方法的相对优缺点。系统地搜索了两个电子数据库,以选择与自行车和路线选择有关的关键字。总共确定了七个系列的方法:GPS设备,智能手机应用程序,众包,参与者召回的路线,伴随的旅程,自我中心相机和虚拟现实。该研究说明了可获得的数据质量和参与者的平均数量之间的权衡。未来的其他方法可能包括无码头自行车共享,使用计算机视觉和沉浸式自行车模拟器环境的多摄像头解决方案。
    One fundamental aspect of promoting utilitarian bicycle use involves making modifications to the built environment to improve the safety, efficiency and enjoyability of cycling. Revealed preference data on bicycle route choice can assist greatly in understanding the actual behaviour of a highly heterogeneous group of users, which in turn assists the prioritisation of infrastructure or other built environment initiatives. This systematic review seeks to compare the relative strengths and weaknesses of the empirical approaches for evaluating whole journey route choices of bicyclists. Two electronic databases were systematically searched for a selection of keywords pertaining to bicycle and route choice. In total seven families of methods are identified: GPS devices, smartphone applications, crowdsourcing, participant-recalled routes, accompanied journeys, egocentric cameras and virtual reality. The study illustrates a trade-off in the quality of data obtainable and the average number of participants. Future additional methods could include dockless bikeshare, multiple camera solutions using computer vision and immersive bicycle simulator environments.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号