IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jecmet/v27y2020i1p66-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Epistemic and non-epistemic values in economic evaluations of public health

Author

Listed:
  • Alessandra Cenci
  • M. Azhar Hussain

Abstract

We review methods for economic evaluation recently developed in health economics by focusing on the epistemic and non-epistemic values they embody. The emphasis is on insights into valuing health, health states or resource management, against conventional approaches using QALY and DALY. The main hypothesis is that economic evaluation and related allocations of economic resources for health and healthcare could be improved by jointly adopting robust methods and broader normative theories within contemporary liberal-egalitarianism. Here, Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach (CA), which shifts attention away from individuals’ preferences for different health, healthcare options and utility maximisation, thereby provide more accurate evaluations of people’s states of health and their objective needs. This combination establishes a beneficial interplay between crucial epistemic values (objectivity-impartiality, consistency, evidence) and non-epistemic values (fairness-equity, redistributive justice). Thus, it is expected to amend methods and normative concepts for economic evaluations of public health in a genuine ‘extra-welfarist’ perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessandra Cenci & M. Azhar Hussain, 2020. "Epistemic and non-epistemic values in economic evaluations of public health," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 66-88, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:27:y:2020:i:1:p:66-88
    DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2019.1646922
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1350178X.2019.1646922
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1350178X.2019.1646922?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jecmet:v:27:y:2020:i:1:p:66-88. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJEC20 .

    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.