IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v320y2023ics0277953623000734.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences for investment in and allocation of additional healthcare capacity

Author

Listed:
  • van Hulsen, Merel A.J.
  • Rohde, Kirsten I.M.
  • van Exel, Job

Abstract

Policy makers need to make decisions regarding the allocation of scarce healthcare resources. We study preferences for investment in additional healthcare capacity and allocation between two regions, focusing on reducing waiting time for elective surgery for a physical health problem. We elicit preferences from a societal and an individual perspective, with unequal initial waiting times between the two regions. In an online survey, 1039 respondents were randomly assigned to one of three versions of the experiment: (1) a social planner perspective, placing respondents in the role of a policy maker; (2) an individual perspective where the respondent's own region was better off regarding initial waiting times; (3) an individual perspective where the individual's own region was worse off regarding initial waiting times. Respondents were asked to rank the status quo and five scenarios where the investment in additional capacity led to different distributions of shorter waiting times between regions. For all allocations we presented both the reduction in waiting time and the resulting final waiting time for both regions. We find that in version 1 of the experiment, preferences were in line with inequality aversion and Rawlsian preferences regarding final waiting time. In version 3, similar preferences were found, although here they also align with individualistic preferences. In version 2, preferences were more heterogeneous, with both individualistic and egalitarian preferences present. Concluding, individualistic and egalitarian preferences mostly concerned final waiting time. We therefore recommend policy makers to focus on the effect on final waiting time instead of the reduction of waiting time.

Suggested Citation

  • van Hulsen, Merel A.J. & Rohde, Kirsten I.M. & van Exel, Job, 2023. "Preferences for investment in and allocation of additional healthcare capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:320:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623000734
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623000734
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115717?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Brouwer, Werner B.F. & Culyer, Anthony J. & van Exel, N. Job A. & Rutten, Frans F.H., 2008. "Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 325-338, March.
    2. Gary Charness & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "Behavioural economics: Preserving rank as a social norm," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(8), pages 1-2, August.
    3. van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Public views on principles for health care priority setting: Findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 128-137.
    4. Wenwen Xie & Benjamin Ho & Stephan Meier & Xinyue Zhou, 2017. "Rank reversal aversion inhibits redistribution across societies," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(8), pages 1-5, August.
    5. Ana Bobinac & N. Job A. van Exel & Frans F. H. Rutten & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2013. "Valuing Qaly Gains By Applying A Societal Perspective," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(10), pages 1272-1281, October.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Paul Dolan, 1999. "Whose Preferences Count?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(4), pages 482-486, October.
    8. Mason, Helen & van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Brouwer, Werner & Donaldson, Cam, 2016. "From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 205-213.
    9. Deffains, Bruno & Espinosa, Romain & Thöni, Christian, 2016. "Political self-serving bias and redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 67-74.
    10. Versteegh, M.M. & Brouwer, W.B.F., 2016. "Patient and general public preferences for health states: A call to reconsider current guidelines," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 66-74.
    11. Sugden, Robert & Williams, Alan, 1978. "The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198770411, Decembrie.
    12. James Konow, 2000. "Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1072-1091, September.
    13. Benning, Tim M. & Dellaert, Benedict G.C., 2013. "Paying more for faster care? Individuals' attitude toward price-based priority access in health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 119-128.
    14. McIntosh, E. & Ryan, M., 2002. "Using discrete choice experiments to derive welfare estimates for the provision of elective surgery: Implications of discontinuous preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 367-382, June.
    15. Bishai, David M. & Lang, Hui Chu, 2000. "The willingness to pay for wait reduction: the disutility of queues for cataract surgery in Canada, Denmark, and Spain," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 219-230, March.
    16. Culyer, A. J. & Wagstaff, Adam, 1993. "Equity and equality in health and health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 431-457, December.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:7:p:602-615 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bogliacino, Francesco & Grimalda, Gianluca & Pipke, David, 2021. "Kind or contented? An investigation of the gift exchange hypothesis in a natural field experiment in Colombia," Kiel Working Papers 2199, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    2. Christoph Engel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2011. "Fairness Ex Ante and Ex Post: Experimentally Testing Ex Post Judicial Intervention into Blockbuster Deals," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 682-708, December.
    3. Lackner, Mario & Sonnabend, Hendrik, 2021. "Coping with advantageous inequity—Field evidence from professional penalty kicking," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Anna Nicolet & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Paul F M Krabbe, 2020. "Value judgment of new medical treatments: Societal and patient perspectives to inform priority setting in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Schmidt, Ulrich & Neyse, Levent & Aleknonyte, Milda, 2015. "Income inequality and risk taking," Kiel Working Papers 2000, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    6. Katarína Danková & Hodaka Morita & Maroš Servátka & Le Zhang, 2022. "Fairness concerns and job assignment to positions with different surplus," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1490-1516, April.
    7. Chen, Daniel L., 2016. "Tastes for Desert and Placation: A Reference Point-Dependent Model of Social Preferences," IAST Working Papers 16-60, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    8. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    9. Rotteveel, Adriënne H. & Lambooij, Mattijs S. & van Exel, Job & de Wit, G. Ardine, 2022. "To what extent do citizens support the disinvestment of healthcare interventions? An exploration of the support for four viewpoints on active disinvestment in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 293(C).
    10. John Bone & Paolo Crosetto & John Hey & Carmen Pasca, 2021. "The Acceptability of Accountability," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 476-501, December.
    11. Schmidt, Ulrich & Neyse, Levent & Aleknonyte, Milda, 2019. "Income inequality and risk taking: the impact of social comparison information," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 87(3), pages 283-297.
    12. Vincent Berthet & Camille Dorin & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud & Vincent de Gardelle, 2020. "How does symbolic success affect redistribution in left-wing voters? A focus on the 2017 French presidential election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-12, March.
    13. Paul Dolan & Daniel Kahneman, 2008. "Interpretations Of Utility And Their Implications For The Valuation Of Health," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 215-234, January.
    14. Anna Hochleitner, 2022. "Fairness in times of crisis: Negative shocks, relative income and preferences for redistribution," Discussion Papers 2022-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    15. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2015. "Desert and inequity aversion in teams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 42-54.
    16. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2006. "Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(8), pages 797-811, August.
    17. Gagnon, Nickolas & Saulle, Riccardo D. & Zaunbrecher, Henrik W., 2021. "Decreasing Incomes Increase Selfishness," FEEM Working Papers 317127, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    18. König, Tobias & Mechtenberg, Lydia & Kübler, Dorothea & Schmacker, Renke, 2023. "Fairness in matching markets: Experimental evidence," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2023-204, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    19. Catherine L. Kling & John A. List & Jinhua Zhao, 2013. "A Dynamic Explanation Of The Willingness To Pay And Willingness To Accept Disparity," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 909-921, January.
    20. Robert Sugden, 2015. "Consumers' surplus when individuals lack integrated preferences: A development of some ideas from Dupuit," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(6), pages 1042-1063, December.

    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:socmed:v:320:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623000734. 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 (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.