Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 8th June 2025, 01:02:34am AoE (anywhere on Earth)
External resources will be made available 30 min before a session starts. You may have to reload the page to access the resources.
Session Chair: Felipe Vásquez-Lavín, Universidad del Desarrollo
Location:Auditorium H
Presentations
Doom and Gloom? The Impact of Environmental News on Mental Health
Philip Carthy1,2, Seraphim Dempsey1,2,3
1Economic and Social Research Institute, Ireland; 2Department of Economics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland; 3Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research, Luxembourg
Does environmental media discourse impact our mental health? This paper examines the relationship between environment-related television news broadcasts and individual-level well-being in the United Kingdom. Relevant news content is identified using quantitative text analysis and recent advances in semi-supervised keyword-assisted topic modelling. The estimated prevalence of environment-related information is linked to a longitudinal household survey in which its associations with contemporaneously collected individual mental health measures can be tested. The empirical strategy relies on within-individual variation and is aided by continuously rolling data collection throughout the analysis period: 2014-2019. Our results do not suggest empirical support for the hypothesis that environmental news adversely affects mental health. We also find limited evidence that heterogeneity across socioeconomic or demographic groups masks an effect or that a potential impact is moderated by the overall sentiment of the relevant news broadcasts.
Unintended effects of Germany's Nuclear Phase Out: A rise in mortality due to non-communicable respiratory diseases
Tuomas Sakari Kaariaho
University of Helsinki, Finland
The discussion on nuclear power balances its risks against carbon emissions resulting from nuclear phase-out. This paper studies an important unintended consequence of abandoning nuclear power: the adverse health effects of increased air pollutants. I use the synthetic control method to study the causal effect of the German nuclear phase-out on mortality. I find that the nuclear plant closures resulted in 16 life years lost each year per 100,000 inhabitants or roughly 180 premature deaths per year from non-communicable respiratory diseases. This effect accounts for an 8\% increase in mortality due to respiratory diseases and corresponds to around one billion euros per year in lost lives.
Economy-wide trade-offs between emission controls and ozone impacts under climate change – assessing agriculture and health effects in Austria
Eva Preinfalk1, Nina Knittel1, Birgit Bednar-Friedl1,2, Brigitte Wolkinger1, Christian Schmidt3, Monika Mayer3, Harald Rieder3
1Wegener Center for Climate and Global Change, University of Graz, Austria; 2Institute of Economics, University of Graz, Graz, Austria; 3Institute of Meteorology and Climatology, BOKU University, Vienna, Austria
As an air pollutant, surface ozone reduces agricultural yields and harms human health. While the control of precursor emissions has improved attainment of air quality standards during the last decades, climate change may increase ozone burdens (climate penalty). This paper analyses the economic and welfare effects of ozone exposure in Austria, contrasting a medium and high greenhouse gas (GHG) emission scenario. The economic assessment is conducted in a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, capturing ozone impacts on agricultural yields and health and the national emission control costs on ozone precursors. We find that in 2050, ozone exposure of the population and cropland is substantially higher in a high, compared to a medium GHG emission scenario. This is attributable to both, an increase in average temperatures and a chemical penalty emerging from elevated methane abundances, facilitating higher ozone background levels. Comparing the costs and benefits, we find that in 2030, emission control costs in a medium GHG emission scenario exceed the benefits of associated reductions of the ozone burden. However, by 2050, the benefits significantly outweigh the costs. This shift is due to higher absolute emission control costs in 2030, while the benefits of emission controls become more pronounced by 2050. While we find distinct and negative effects on agricultural yields, health effects dominate the welfare effects across all scenarios, increasing climate-induced fatalities by up to 30%. Since ozone is a short-lived gas, national emission controls show clear benefits: when Austrian ozone precursor emissions follow a more stringent path within a high global GHG emission scenario, benefits clearly exceed costs. These results encourage unilateral action as a means to reduce local air pollution in the short term, challenging the common notion that GHG emission abatement is a purely public good.
Heterogeneity in Risk Perception and the Statistical Value of Life: A Multicountry Comparative Analysis of Psychometric and Cultural Theory Approaches
Felipe Vásquez-Lavín1, Manuel Barrientos2, Mauricio Leiva3
1Universidad del Desarrollo, Chile; 2Durham University, UK; 3Universidad del Bío-Bío
The study explores the integration of risk perception theories, specifically the Psychometric Paradigm and Cultural Theory of Risk, into estimating the Value of a Statistical Life (VSL) through the Hybrid Choice Modeling (HCM) framework. By incorporating these theories into the HCM framework, the study aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how psychological and cultural factors influence individuals’ willingness to pay (WTP) for risk reductions.
