Valuing risk, saving lives: reframing VSL role in Pakistan’s policy future

In the architecture of public policy, some of the most powerful tools operate quietly in the background. The Value of Statistical Life (VSL) is one such instrument. Highly influential, yet persistently misunderstood. VSL underpins decisions across public health, environmental regulation, transport safety, and disaster risk management, shaping how governments weigh costs against lives saved. Despite its significance, VSL remains underutilised in policy discourse in countries like Pakistan. At its core, VSL is not about placing a price tag on human life, a notion that is both ethically flawed and analytically incorrect. Rather, it reflects society’s willingness to pay for marginal reductions in mortality risk. It captures a fundamental economic truth: individuals and societies constantly make trade-offs between safety and other goods, whether knowingly or implicitly. Recognising this shifts the narrative from “valuing life” to “valuing risk reduction”, a far more precise and policy-relevant concept. This distinction becomes particularly powerful when applied to disaster risk management, an area where decisions made before and after a crisis can determine the scale of human loss. VSL helps shift policy from reactive disaster response to anticipatory risk management, where saving lives before a disaster strikes becomes a measurable return on investment. In pre-disaster contexts, VSL can transform how preparedness and prevention investments are evaluated. Too often, spending on early warning systems, climate-resilient infrastructure, urban drainage, or heat action plans is deprioritised because benefits are uncertain or politically invisible. VSL addresses this gap by explicitly quantifying the value of lives that could be saved through such measures. For example, investments in flood forecasting systems or cyclone shelters can be assessed not only by the infrastructure cost but by the expected reduction in mortality risk. This enables policymakers to justify proactive spending as economically sound, rather than treating it as discretionary. In essence, VSL helps shift policy from reactive disaster response to anticipatory risk management, where saving lives before a disaster strikes becomes a measurable return on investment. Also read: Designing finance for reality: bringing rural women into the economic mainstream In post-disaster contexts, VSL plays an equally critical role in recovery and reconstruction planning. After a disaster, governments face urgent decisions about where to allocate limited resources: rebuilding infrastructure, restoring livelihoods, or strengthening systems for future resilience. VSL can help prioritise interventions that reduce future mortality risks most effectively. For instance, rebuilding housing to higher safety standards, relocating vulnerable communities, or investing in resilient health systems can be evaluated in terms of lives protected in future events. Moreover, VSL can support damage and loss assessments by incorporating the economic value of mortality impacts, ensuring that human losses are not treated as intangible compared to physical damages. A stark illustration of this gap and opportunity can be seen in the aftermath of the 2022 Pakistan floods. The floods affected over 33 million people and caused widespread devastation to infrastructure, agriculture, and livelihoods. While economic losses were extensively documented in monetary terms, the valuation of human lives lost remained largely implicit in policy analysis. As a result, recovery discussions focused heavily on rebuilding physical assets, often without fully integrating the long-term value of reducing future mortality risks. Had a structured VSL framework been embedded in planning, it could have reshaped both preparedness and recovery strategies. Before the floods, investments in early warning systems, resilient housing, and protective infrastructure could have been justified more strongly by quantifying lives potentially saved. After the floods, VSL could have guided reconstruction toward safer settlement planning, climate-resilient infrastructure, and strengthened health systems, prioritising interventions not just on cost, but on their capacity to reduce future loss of life. Beyond sudden disasters, Pakistan also faces slower, chronic risks that quietly impose a heavy mortality burden. Air pollution is one of the most pressing examples, particularly in Lahore, which frequently ranks among the most polluted cities globally. Unlike floods or earthquakes, smog-related deaths occur gradually and are often underrepresented in economic and policy assessments. Here, VSL becomes especially powerful. By estimating the value of reduced mortality risk from improved air quality, policymakers can quantify the benefits of interventions such as stricter emissions standards, cleaner transport systems, and industrial regulation. Emerging global evidence reinforces that VSL is not a luxury for high-income countries but a practical tool for developing economies. This reframes air quality management from an environmental concern into a high-return economic investment. For instance, reducing fine particulate matter (PM2. 5) levels can significantly lower premature deaths from respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. When these avoided deaths are monetised using VSL, the benefits often outweigh the costs of regulatory action by a substantial margin. This strengthens the case for decisive and sustained policy measures, even when they involve short-term economic trade-offs. Taken together, these examples highlight how VSL can operate across the full spectrum of risk, whether sudden disasters or slow-onset crises. It provides a unifying metric that brings consistency to decision-making and ensures that saving lives is explicitly valued across sectors. For Pakistan, the urgency of adopting such an approach is clear. The country is increasingly exposed to compound risks: intensifying floods, prolonged heatwaves, earthquakes, and deteriorating air quality. These hazards not only cause immediate devastation but also create long-term vulnerabilities. Yet, without a consistent framework like VSL, investments in risk reduction and resilient recovery are often undervalued, leading to cycles of damage and reconstruction rather than sustained resilience. Emerging global evidence reinforces that VSL is not a luxury for high-income countries but a practical tool for developing economies. Studies show that even in data-constrained environments, VSL can be estimated and adapted to local contexts. More importantly, it allows policymakers to compare interventions across sectors on a common scale, whether investing in healthcare, climate adaptation, or disaster preparedness by translating life-saving benefits into economic terms. However, a key challenge for Pakistan is the reliance on transferred VSL estimates from high-income countries. While these provide a useful starting point, they often fail to capture local realities, including informal labor markets, varying risk perceptions, and socio-cultural factors. Developing context-specific VSL estimates should therefore be seen as a strategic priority, enabling more accurate and equitable policy decisions. Integrating VSL into Pakistan’s policy framework could fundamentally reshape how investments are prioritised. In climate resilience, it would ensure that the life-saving benefits of early warning systems and protective infrastructure are fully accounted for. Also read: Insurance must move to the center of Pakistan’s economic planning In urban planning, it would strengthen the case for heat mitigation strategies and air quality improvements. In disaster recovery, it would guide reconstruction toward safer, more resilient systems rather than simply restoring what existed before. Beyond technical analysis, VSL also enhances resource mobilisation. It provides a clear and compelling narrative for both domestic and international stakeholders by answering a critical question: how much value is generated by saving lives? This is particularly important in securing climate finance and disaster risk funding, where demonstrating measurable impact is essential. Admittedly, challenges remain. Estimating VSL requires robust methodology, and ethical concerns must be addressed through transparent communication. Policymakers must clearly articulate that VSL values risk reduction, not human life itself. Building public understanding and trust will be key to its successful adoption. Looking ahead, the real question is not whether Pakistan can afford to adopt VSL, but whether it can afford not to. As disasters become more frequent and severe and as chronic risks like air pollution continue to rise, the cost of undervaluing life-saving interventions will only increase. Embedding VSL into policy and planning processes offers a pathway toward more proactive, evidence-based, and human-centered governance. Ultimately, valuing risk appropriately is about recognising what truly matters. In a country navigating complex and overlapping challenges, VSL offers more than a metric, it offers a lens that brings human lives to the center of decision-making, before disaster strikes and long after recovery begins.

Read full story on Business Recorder