IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v94y2010i3p255-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kidney black markets and legal transplants: Are they opposite sides of the same coin?

Author

Listed:
  • Mendoza, Roger Lee

Abstract

Objectives This study investigates why the illegal traffic of kidneys exists and remains resilient in the Philippines. It also evaluates the efficacy of the legal and regulatory framework for kidney (and organ) transplantation, and the corresponding implications for health policy. The experiences of comparable countries are noted.Methods Three surveys were employed in this study: 1) a review of related literature on kidney black markets; 2) questionnaire-based interviews of a multi-stage probability sample of 131 kidney vendors from the two largest supplier regions in the Philippines; and 3) a comparative content analysis of pertinent legal and regulatory measures to address the underground kidney trade.Results Survey results, based on a 4.0 percent statistical margin of error, indicate that kidney vendors are typically males (98.4 percent) who belong to the lower income classes/groups D and E (88.5 percent). The vast majority of vendors (89.2 percent) were unrelated to kidney recipients, many of whom were of foreign descent (60.3 percent). The study finds that certain key elements underpin the kidney black market in the Philippines: an open, brokered and compensation-based contractual system between unrelated donors and sellers. These elements are sustained and reinforced by a robust supply-and-demand interface anchored on brokerage pricing, government incapacity, policy contradictions and public tolerance or indifference.Conclusion The study suggests that the relative ambiguity of, and continuity between, the legal and underground kidney transplant systems be carefully addressed prior to enacting more specific reforms. The study also calls attention to the unintended consequences of various reform efforts, which are often neglected in formulating health policy and evaluating its costs and benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Mendoza, Roger Lee, 2010. "Kidney black markets and legal transplants: Are they opposite sides of the same coin?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 255-265, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:94:y:2010:i:3:p:255-265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(09)00267-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary S. Becker & Julio Jorge Elías, 2007. "Introducing Incentives in the Market for Live and Cadaveric Organ Donations," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 3-24, Summer.
    2. Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2005. "Efficient Kidney Exchange: Coincidence of Wants in a Structured Market," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 621, Boston College Department of Economics.
    3. Alvin E. Roth, 2007. "Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 37-58, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beckert, Jens & Wehinger, Frank, 2011. "In the shadow illegal markets and economic sociology," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/9, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2008. "Motivating Altruism: A Field Study," IZA Discussion Papers 3770, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 79-112.
    3. Michael A. Clemens, 2018. "Testing for Repugnance in Economic Transactions: Evidence from Guest Work in the Gulf," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(S1), pages 5-44.
    4. Nicolas Brisset, 2016. "Institutions as Emergent Phenomena: Redefining Downward Causation," Working Papers halshs-01425669, HAL.
    5. Mohammad Akbarpour & Julien Combe & Yinghua He & Victor Hiller & Robert Shimer & Olivier Tercieux, 2020. "Unpaired Kidney Exchange: Overcoming Double Coincidence of Wants without Money," Post-Print halshs-02973042, HAL.
    6. Condorelli, Daniele, 2013. "Market and non-market mechanisms for the optimal allocation of scarce resources," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 582-591.
    7. Karen Evelyn Hauge & Snorre Kverndokk & Andreas Lange, 2021. "Why People Oppose Trade Institutions - On Morality, Fairness and Risky Actions," CESifo Working Paper Series 9456, CESifo.
    8. Sandro Ambuehl & Axel Ockenfels, 2017. "The Ethics of Incentivizing the Uninformed: A Vignette Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 91-95, May.
    9. Snorre Kverndokk, 2013. "Moral positions on tradable permit markets," Chapters, in: Roger Fouquet (ed.), Handbook on Energy and Climate Change, chapter 22, pages 490-499, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Stacy Dickert-Conlin & Todd Elder & Brian Moore, 2011. "Donorcycles: Motorcycle Helmet Laws and the Supply of Organ Donors," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 907-935.
    11. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario & Stith, Sarah S., 2014. "Removing financial barriers to organ and bone marrow donation: The effect of leave and tax legislation in the U.S," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-56.
    12. Walter Castro & Julio Elias, 2022. "Injecting Adam Smith’s Ideas in the Market for Kidney Transplants," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 828, Universidad del CEMA.
    13. Marie Daou & Alain Marciano, 2022. "Commodification: The traditional pro-market arguments," Post-Print hal-03876907, HAL.
    14. Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis & Robert Slonim, 2011. "Rewarding Altruism? A Natural Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 17636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Theodore C. Bergstrom & Rodney J. Garratt & Damien Sheehan-Connor, 2009. "One Chance in a Million: Altruism and the Bone Marrow Registry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1309-1334, September.
    16. Becker, Gary S. & Elias, Julio Jorge & Ye, Karen J., 2022. "The shortage of kidneys for transplant: Altruism, exchanges, opt in vs. opt out, and the market for kidneys," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 211-226.
    17. Elias, Julio & Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2016. "Efficiency-Morality Trade-Offs in Repugnant Transactions: A Choice Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 10187, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Li, Mengling & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Xu, Menghan, 2022. "Remedying adverse selection in donor-priority rule using freeze period: Theory and experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 384-407.
    19. Alvin E. Roth, 2007. "Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 37-58, Summer.
    20. Tayfun Sönmez & M Utku Ünver, 2017. "Market design for living-donor organ exchanges: an economic policy perspective," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 676-704.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:94:y:2010:i:3:p:255-265. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.