Welfare costs reach $2.8 billion to $5 billion
annually
YALE SCHOOL OF
FORESTRY & ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
As people across the northeastern U.S. begin
venturing back into the outdoors with the arrival of spring, they will make 1
billion fewer trips than they otherwise would have if Lyme disease didn't
exist, a new Yale study concludes.
In an analysis published in the journal Environmental
and Resource Economics, researchers found that perceived risks of
contracting Lyme disease on average cause a person in the Northeast to forego
eight 73-minute outdoor trips per year, costing them about nine hours of
outdoor time per year.
Although the cost of individual lost trips is small --
about $2.75 to $5 -- the total cost roughly $2.8 billion to $5 billion annually
due to the large number of people in the region.
"But the cost is not what
people spend on doctors, or medicine, or even bug spray. These are costs that
everybody incurs because we're all choosing second-choice activities to avoid
getting Lyme disease."
"It's a lot of people making very small
changes, but in such a densely populated region that has major impacts."
Lyme disease is caused by the bacterium
Borrelia burgdorferi and is transmitted to humans through the bite of an
infected blacklegged tick, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC).
Prevalent across the northeastern U.S. and the Great
Lakes region, the disease causes fever, headaches, fatigue, and skin rash. It
can be prevented by use of repellents and removing ticks, as well as costly
steps to remove tick habitat.
Or, as the researchers illustrate,
individuals can simply find alternative activities to avoid tick habitat
altogether.
To evaluate how the risk of Lyme disease
impacts human behavior, the researchers analyzed data from the American Time
Use Survey -- a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics-based project that provides
nationally representative estimates on how, when, and with whom people spend
their time -- and CDC data from 2003 to 2012.
After comparing those datasets, they found
that the average individual in the average county spent 1.54 fewer minutes
outside per day in response to an average of 72.17 Lyme disease cases reported
to the CDC. This amounts to about 9.41 hours annually.
The research team say that though it is
difficult to put a monetary cost on these lost opportunities, they calculate
welfare loss based on the amount individuals are willing to spend to travel to
recreate outdoors relative to spending leisure time at home -- the location of
most indoor leisure.
"People are giving up trips, and it's
not just hiking and camping in the woods," said Kevin Berry, a former
postdoctoral scholar at F&ES and the lead author of the study.
"It's
trips to the park, soccer games, or walks and bike rides in places where there
are stands of trees and tall grasses... a wide variety of activities pretty
much anywhere in this part of the Northeast that's outdoors."
The findings illustrate the importance of
careful evaluation when evaluating the ecosystem services and, in some cases,
ecosystem "disservices" of nature. Indeed, though the historical
notion that forests are places for humans to fear has largely been replaced by
recognition that these spaces provide important services -- including
recreational opportunities -- there remain some risks that can undermine these
potential benefits, including the threat of tick-borne Lyme disease.
Lyme disease is representative of many
environmental problems, Fenichel said; environmental risks and harms can have
seemingly minor impacts on individuals, but can impose profound costs on
society.
"It's an issue that affects all of us,
but it's one of those environmental challenges that are so difficult to handle
as a society," Fenichel said. "It's a big issue in aggregate -- up to
$5 billion in this case -- but to any one of us it's not a big issue. Everybody
cares a little bit, but perhaps not enough to take action. Though, in aggregate
we'd be much better off if we cooperate to deal with Lyme disease."
###
The study was a collaboration between Fenichel and three
former postdoctoral scholars at F&ES: Berry, who is now at the University
of Alaska, Anchorage; Jude Bayham, who is now at California State University at
Chico; and Spencer Meyer, a senior conservationist at the Highstead Foundation.