Transcript
NARRATOR
If you could choose between saving someone's life or giving 1,000 strangers a free cup of coffee, what would you pick? Assuming each coffee has a small amount of value, 1,000 coffees would have a large amount of value. We just need to add them together.
Of course, a life is still more valuable. But what if we kept adding more-- a million coffees, a trillion? Surely there comes a point when the coffees would be more valuable than saving a life. Yet most of us would never trade a person's life for any number of free coffees.
This example illustrates the aggregation problem. If we agree that minor benefits like coffees can be added up or aggregated, then we are seemingly forced to agree to some unappealing hypothetical trades. The aggregation problem can arise in many areas, including the conservation of cultural heritage. To explain, the benefit of visiting a heritage site is typically rather minor but enjoyed by large numbers of people.
[CAMERA CLICKING]
Say a government had to choose between giving a pot of funding to health care or heritage conservation. The first would save one additional life. The second would save one important heritage site. Assume the heritage site is enjoyed by millions. Can these minor benefits be added up? If so, saving the site could be incredibly valuable, perhaps even more than saving a life.
Yet if we cannot add up the minor benefits of heritage, then funding health care would be better in this case. In fact, while hospitals and lifesaving charities could still use additional funds, it would be difficult to justify any spending on heritage at all.