On the Integration of Equality Considerations into the Life Quality Index Concept for Managing Disaster Risk
Source abstract
Abstract
Decisions about investments in public disaster risk mitigation projects are to be made in presence of many other investments a society could possibly perform. In order to derive a statement about the advantageousness of a particular disaster risk reduction initiative in comparison to other potential investments, the cost of the intervention has to be put in relation to the expected benefits that go in line with it. The question if the benefits outweigh the cost entails a transformation of the primary non monetary benefits due to disaster risk reduction into monetary units, where especially the valuation of reduced mortality risk can be conveniently assessed by applying the net benefit criterion derived from the life quality index (LQI). But as public risk reduction interventions usually involve a great variety of affected people, cost effectiveness is only one determinant in declaring a project as being socially beneficial. Only if the concept is widened to also account for the distributional consequences, i.e. the identification of winners and losers from the intervention, it can be guaranteed that a great number of individuals profit from the enhanced safety standards. This paper addresses this issue by extending the conventional net benefit criterion to also incorporating distributional effects in the decision process and demanding an equally distributed share of cost and benefits throughout society. Thus, in a welfare economic sense more comprehensive risk reduction acceptance criteria are derived.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Agricultural risk and resilience
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (15)
Show source-provided references
1. Nathwani, J. S., Lind, N. C. and Pandey, M. D.: Affordable Safety by Choice: The Life Quality Method. Institute of Risk Research, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 1997.
2. Pandey, M. D. and Nathwani, J. S.: Life quality index for the estimation of societal willigness to pay for safety. Structural Safety, 26, 181–199, Elsevier Science, 2004.10.1016/j.strusafe.2003.05.001 ↗
3. Pareto, V.: Manuel d'economic politique, Girard, Paris, 1904.
4. Kaldor · Economic Journal · 1939 · 49 · 54910.2307/2224835 ↗
5. Hicks, J.: Value and Capital, Clarendon Oxford, 1939.
6. Debreu, G.: Valuation Equilibrium and Pareto Optimum. Porceedings of National Academics of Science 40, 1954.10.1073/pnas.40.7.588 ↗
7. Arrow, K. J.; Social Choice and Individual Values, Wiley, NewYork, 1951.
8. Sen, A : On Economic Inequality. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1973.10.1093/0198281935.001.0001 ↗
9. Love, R. and Wolfson, M. C.: Income Inequality: Statistical methodology and Canadian illustrations, Statistics Canada Cataloguo No. 13–559, 1986.
10. Nygard, F. and Sandstrom, A.: Measuring Income Inequality, Almqvist & Wiksell International, Sweden, 1981.
11. Lugo, M. A.: Comparing Multidimensional Indices of Inequality: Methods and Application. Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, Working Paper 14, 2005.
12. Diez, H.: Unit-Consistent Aggregative Multidimensional Inequality Measures: A Characterization. Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, Working Paper 66, 2007.
13. Pandey, M. D. and Nathwani, J. S.: Measurement of Socio- Economic Inequality Using the Life Quality Index. Social Indicators Research 39: 187–202, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.
14. Osberg, L. and Sharpe, A.: Human and Economic Well Being: What Values are Implicit in Current Indices? Conference Proceedings WIDER Conference on Inequality, Poverty and Human Well-being, Helsinki 2003.
15. Easterlin, R.: Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot. Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, New York Academic Press, Inc., N.Y., USA 1974.10.1016/B978-0-12-205050-3.50008-7 ↗