Protective Behaviour of Citizens to Transport Accidents Involving Hazardous Materials: A Discrete Choice Experiment Applied to Populated Areas Nearby Waterways

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2015 Nov 17

PMID 26571374

Citations 1

Authors

Esther W de Bekker-Grob

Arnold D Bergstra

Michiel C J Bliemer

Inge J M Trijssenaar-Buhre

Alex Burdorf

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: To improve the information for and preparation of citizens at risk to hazardous material transport accidents, a first important step is to determine how different characteristics of hazardous material transport accidents will influence citizens' protective behaviour. However, quantitative studies investigating citizens' protective behaviour in case of hazardous material transport accidents are scarce.

Methods: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among subjects (19-64 years) living in the direct vicinity of a large waterway. Scenarios were described by three transport accident characteristics: odour perception, smoke/vapour perception, and the proportion of people in the environment that were leaving at their own discretion. Subjects were asked to consider each scenario as realistic and to choose the alternative that was most appealing to them: staying, seeking shelter, or escaping. A panel error component model was used to quantify how different transport accident characteristics influenced subjects' protective behaviour.

Results: The response was 44% (881/1,994). The predicted probability that a subject would stay ranged from 1% in case of a severe looking accident till 62% in case of a mild looking accident. All three transport accident characteristics proved to influence protective behaviour. Particularly a perception of strong ammonia or mercaptan odours and visible smoke/vapour close to citizens had the strongest positive influence on escaping. In general, 'escaping' was more preferred than 'seeking shelter', although stated preference heterogeneity among subjects for these protective behaviour options was substantial. Males were less willing to seek shelter than females, whereas elderly people were more willing to escape than younger people.

Conclusion: Various characteristics of transport accident involving hazardous materials influence subjects' protective behaviour. The preference heterogeneity shows that information needs to be targeted differently depending on gender and age to prepare citizens properly.

Citing Articles

Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.

Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob E, Ellis A, Vass C Pharmacoeconomics. 2018; 37(2):201-226.

PMID: 30392040 PMC: 6386055. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2.

References

Ryan M, Watson V . Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments. Health Econ. 2008; 18(4):389-401. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1364. View

Lindell M, Perry R . The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Anal. 2011; 32(4):616-32. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x. View

de Bekker-Grob E, Hol L, Donkers B, van Dam L, Habbema J, van Leerdam M . Labeled versus unlabeled discrete choice experiments in health economics: an application to colorectal cancer screening. Value Health. 2009; 13(2):315-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00670.x. View

Hiselius L . Using choice experiments to assess people's preferences for railway transports of hazardous materials. Risk Anal. 2005; 25(5):1199-214. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00660.x. View

de Bekker-Grob E, Ryan M, Gerard K . Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ. 2012; 21(2):145-72. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1697. View

Lancsar E, Louviere J . Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008; 26(8):661-77. DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004. View

Wordsworth S, Ryan M, Skatun D, Waugh N . Women's preferences for cervical cancer screening: a study using a discrete choice experiment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006; 22(3):344-50. DOI: 10.1017/s0266462306051245. View

Brewer N, Weinstein N, Cuite C, Herrington J . Risk perceptions and their relation to risk behavior. Ann Behav Med. 2004; 27(2):125-30. DOI: 10.1207/s15324796abm2702_7. View

Bridges J, Hauber A, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser L, Regier D . Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011; 14(4):403-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013. View

10.

Hall J, Fiebig D, King M, Hossain I, Louviere J . What influences participation in genetic carrier testing? Results from a discrete choice experiment. J Health Econ. 2005; 25(3):520-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2005.09.002. View

11.

Sutton S . Social-psychological approaches to understanding addictive behaviours: attitude-behaviour and decision-making models. Br J Addict. 1987; 82(4):355-70. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1987.tb01492.x. View

12.

Reed Johnson F, Lancsar E, Marshall D, Kilambi V, Muhlbacher A, Regier D . Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013; 16(1):3-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223. View

13.

Hundley V, Ryan M . Are women's expectations and preferences for intrapartum care affected by the model of care on offer?. BJOG. 2004; 111(6):550-60. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00152.x. View

14.

Linley W, Hughes D . Decision-makers' preferences for approving new medicines in Wales: a discrete-choice experiment with assessment of external validity. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013; 31(4):345-55. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-013-0030-0. View

15.

Ryan M . Discrete choice experiments in health care. BMJ. 2004; 328(7436):360-1. PMC: 341374. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.328.7436.360. View

16.

Weinstein N . Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior. Health Psychol. 1993; 12(4):324-33. DOI: 10.1037//0278-6133.12.4.324. View

17.

Ratcliffe J, Van Haselen R, Buxton M, Hardy K, Colehan J, Partridge M . Assessing patients' preferences for characteristics associated with homeopathic and conventional treatment of asthma: a conjoint analysis study. Thorax. 2002; 57(6):503-8. PMC: 1746347. DOI: 10.1136/thorax.57.6.503. View

18.

Sorensen J, Shumpert B, Vogt B . Planning for protective action decision making: evacuate or shelter-in-place. J Hazard Mater. 2004; 109(1-3):1-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.03.004. View

19.

Mark T, Swait J . Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions. Health Econ. 2004; 13(6):563-73. DOI: 10.1002/hec.845. View

20.

Clark M, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob E . Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014; 32(9):883-902. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x. View