ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2026
Survival First: How Citizens Prioritize Competing Climate-Health Risk Countermeasures Under Fiscal Constraints.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When governments must allocate limited resources among competing climate-health countermeasures, citizen risk priorities determine political feasibility-yet whether those priorities translate into fiscal support remains poorly understood. This study develops a hybrid best-worst scaling and contingent valuation framework that integrates individual-level priority parameters into an acceptance model, enabling direct testing of whether preference intensity predicts willingness to pay. Applied to a large-sample survey of residents in Yokohama, Japan-a rapidly aging metropolis facing escalating heat emergencies-the analysis reveals three findings. First, citizens exhibit a survival-first hierarchy, decisively prioritizing immediate protective measures over long-term structural interventions, with consensus varying sharply across countermeasure types. Second, a systematic priority-WTP disconnect emerges: The priority parameters for the most valued measures show no statistically detectable association with acceptance of the proposed payment, consistent with a possible entitlement interpretation in which life-saving services are perceived as government obligations rather than goods warranting additional taxation, while a group of lower-ranked supplementary measures is jointly associated with greater fiscal support. Third, chronic quality-of-life burdens-particularly sleep disruption-are more consistently associated with willingness to pay than are acute health symptoms, while private cooling costs are negatively associated with support for public adaptation, consistent with a crowding-out mechanism that may pose a regressive barrier to equitable financing. These findings suggest that preference intensity and fiscal support may operate through partially distinct evaluative pathways, implying that standard valuation methods relying on willingness to pay alone can systematically misrepresent the structure of public risk priorities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.