A Probabilistic Analysis of the Passive–Restraint Question

John D. Graham and Max Henrion

Risk Analysis, 1984, vol. 4, issue 1, 25-40

Abstract: The benefits and costs of automobile safety policies are compared using a methodology which explicitly quantifies the uncertainties. The policies addressed include both voluntary and compulsory manual belt usage, nondetachable passive (automatic) seat belts, and air bags. Estimates of the effectiveness and usage rates of these alternatives were obtained in the form of subjective probability distributions from eight experts. Their opinions were combined using equal weighting. The direct economic costs of the technologies were also estimated probabilistically. The number of lives saved and the net benefits of the policies were calculated probabilistically for a range of values of lifesaving. Probabilistic computations and sensitivity analysis were performed by the Demos modelling system using Monte Carlo simulation. The results are highly uncertain and quite sensitive to the value of lifesaving. Nevertheless, they imply that repeal of the passive‐restraint standard is defensible according to the net‐benefit criterion only if a relatively low value is assigned to lifesaving. The degree of uncertainty emphasizes the potential value of demonstration programs to obtain better information.

Date: 1984
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00129.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:riskan:v:4:y:1984:i:1:p:25-40

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Risk Analysis from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().