Of course, subjective risk perception may not correspond to actual risk. For instance, a devastating, highly evocative singularity like an earthquake and a more diffuse and constantly present phenomenon such as air pollution, may have the same mortality rates, but people would not necessarily accept the same marginal increase in income for the mortality risk in being exposed to each. Cameron (2010) thus rightly remarks: “‘The VSL’ is not some true-but-unknown fundamental constant of nature that we merely need to measure more accurately. Instead, ‘the VSL’ is the result of attempts to find a convenient one-size-fits-all measure of demand for risk reductions - a number that may or may not be appropriate across all different types of risks or all different affected populations."