Next Article in Journal
Examining Associations of Environmental Characteristics with Recreational Cycling Behaviour by Street-Level Strava Data
Previous Article in Journal
Association between Food for Life, a Whole Setting Healthy and Sustainable Food Programme, and Primary School Children’s Consumption of Fruit and Vegetables: A Cross-Sectional Study in England
Open AccessArticle

An Evaluation of the Proposed Worker Protection Standard with Respect to Pesticide Exposure and Parkinson’s Disease

1
Department of Economics, Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28035, USA
2
Departments of Economics and Environmental Studies, Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28035, USA
3
Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center, Urban Institute, Washington, DC 20037, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14(6), 640; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14060640
Received: 16 February 2017 / Revised: 6 June 2017 / Accepted: 7 June 2017 / Published: 14 June 2017
(This article belongs to the Section Health Economics)
Citing a lack of information, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prudently did not account for the benefits of averting many chronic diseases in analyzing the Worker Protection Standards (WPS) revisions. We demonstrate that sufficient information can exist, using the example of the benefits to agricultural workers of reduced Parkinson’s disease (PD) due to reduced pesticide exposure. We define the benefits as the monetary value gained by improving quality of lives of people who would otherwise develop PD, plus the value of medical care cost averted and income not lost due to being healthy. For estimation, we use readily available parameters and obtain odds ratios of developing PD by conducting a meta-analysis of studies linking pesticide exposure to PD. The sensitivity analysis varies the number of agricultural workers affected by the regulation, the probability of being diagnosed with PD, the measurement and the timing of the benefits. Our initial assessment is that the reduced PD benefits would be a small fraction of the total WPS revision costs. However, if we define benefits as the common environmental economics willingness to pay to avoid PD incidence, then they become a substantial fraction of the costs. Our analysis demonstrates that the benefits of averting PD from the WPS revisions can be estimated using existing information, and that the results are most sensitive to the choice of valuation of benefits to the worker. We encourage other researchers to extend our framework to other chronic ailments. View Full-Text
Keywords: Parkinson’s disease; pesticide exposure; benefit analysis; cost analysis Parkinson’s disease; pesticide exposure; benefit analysis; cost analysis
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sparling, A.S.; Martin, D.W.; Posey, L.B. An Evaluation of the Proposed Worker Protection Standard with Respect to Pesticide Exposure and Parkinson’s Disease. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 640.

AMA Style

Sparling AS, Martin DW, Posey LB. An Evaluation of the Proposed Worker Protection Standard with Respect to Pesticide Exposure and Parkinson’s Disease. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2017; 14(6):640.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sparling, Alica S.; Martin, David W.; Posey, Lillian B. 2017. "An Evaluation of the Proposed Worker Protection Standard with Respect to Pesticide Exposure and Parkinson’s Disease" Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14, no. 6: 640.

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop