WRITTEN QUESTION E-1575/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 May 2000)

Subject: Relation between mortality rates and air pollution

In reply to my recent question (E-2270/99)(1) concerning ozone levels in Greece, the Commission stated that the cost-benefit analysis of the proposal showed that benefits were higher than costs. For the first time in an EU document, tables 9 to 12 of the annex to the explanatory memorandum of the proposal for a directive on national emission ceilings (COM(1999) 125)(2) give figures which, upon analysis, yield actual mortality rates.

As these figures are extremely alarming and any conclusions that may be drawn by a non-expert reading of the document are fraught with risk, will the Commission say:

1. what the probable number of fatalities is in Greece on the basis of which the total benefits were calculated in tables 9 to 12 of the annex (99/0067 COD) concerning acute and chronic mortality,

2. how the same calculations were made for morbidity, and

3. why two different parameters, VOSL and VOLU, are used?

(1) OJ C 219 E, 1.8.2000, p. 135.

(2) OJ C 56 E, 29.2.2000, p. 34.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2000)

1. Tables 10 and 11 of the explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposal for a directive on national emission ceilings (COM(1999) 125) illustrate the monetised benefits resulting from emission

control measures additional to those proscribed in existing legislation (i.e. benefits additional to those associated with the Reference scenario). These benefits result from emissions reductions beyond the reference scenario for the four pollutants comprising nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) sulphur dioxide (SO2) and ammonia. The monetised benefits calculated for Greece are based upon a reduced level of premature mortality (70 cases) related to short-term exposure to ozone and secondary particulate matter, and a decrease of approximately 1700 in life years lost.

2. The analysis starts with quantification of the change in exposure of the population and sensitive groups which results from the emission reduction of the Commission proposal. In order to quantify the change in incidence of the effects of air pollution, exposure response functions are applied for various types of illnesses and diseases. Several types of health impact on morbidity were considered including acute effects such as bronchidolator usage in asthmatics, cough in asthmatics, lower respiratory symptoms in asthmatics, asthma attacks, respiratory hospital admissions, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular hospital admissions, restrictive activity days and chronic effects such as incidence of bronchitis, cough. Benefits are quantified using information on willingness to pay to avoid these illnesses, combined with the costs for medical treatment, etc.

3. The monetised values that are attached to chronic and acute mortality impacts are difficult to assess and the subject of much debate. To indicate the range of results that can be derived from different assumptions, the Commission's study employs two different approaches: it considers the value of a statistical life (VOSL) and the value of a lost life year (VOLY).

The VOSL technique assesses the willingness-to-pay of individuals to reduce the risk of mortality. The result is an indicator of the importance that people attach to risk, and not an assessment of how valuable life is per se. The approach taken here used relatively conservative estimates of 2,2 million as the VOSL for acute mortality effects and 1,1 million for the VOSL for chronic mortality effects. There has been some debate about the appropriateness of using the VOSL for cases where the reduction in life expectancy attributable to exposure is small. An alternative approach is to attach a value to each life year lost (VOLY) as a result of premature mortality, thereby adjusting for the short life expectancy of those affected. The Commission's study uses a value of 110 000 a life year lost for acute mortality and 67 000 for chronic mortality.

However, it can also be argued that the VOLY approach is inconsistent with the empirical evidence on the relation between age and willingness to pay to avoid risk. Rather than address the debate between VOSL and VOLY directly, the benefit assessment uses both approaches to indicate the sensitivity of the benefits analysis to this issue. Therefore, for both chronic and acute health effects there are two measures of the benefits, of which the lower estimates reflect the use of the VOLY approach and the higher estimates the VOSL approach.