This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Estimating the monetary value of health care: lessons from environmental economics

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Nick Hanley (Economics Department, University of Glasgow, UK)
Mandy Ryan (Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK)
Robert Wright (Economics Department, University of Stirling, UK)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In the recent past, considerable effort in health economics has been made on applying stated preference methods such as contingent valuation and choice experiments. Despite this increased use, there is still considerable scepticism concerning the value of these approaches. The application of contingent valuation in environmental economics has a long history and has been widely accepted. Whilst choice experiments were introduced to the environmental and health economics literature at a similar time, the wider acceptance of monetary measures of benefit in environmental economics has meant that they have also been more widely applied. The purpose of this paper is to identify some of the key issues and debates that have taken place in the environmental economics literature, summarise the state of the art with respect to these issues, and consider how health economists have addressed these issues. Important areas for future research in health economics are identified. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/hec.763
File Format: text/html
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 12 (2003)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 3-16
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:12:y:2003:i:1:p:3-16

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Donaldson, Cam & Thomas, Ruth & Torgerson, David J, 1997. "Validity of Open-Ended and Payment Scale Approaches to Eliciting Willingness to Pay," Applied Economics, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 79-84, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Nick Hanley & Clive L Spash, 1993. "Preferences, Information and Biodiversity Preservation," Working Papers Series 93/12, University of Stirling, Department of Economics.
    Other versions:
  3. Johannesson, Magnus & Jonsson, Bengt & Borgquist, Lars, 1991. "Willingness to pay for antihypertensive therapy -- results of a Swedish pilot study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 461-473. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Thomas C. Brown & Patricia A. Champ & Richard C. Bishop & Daniel W. McCollum, 1996. "Which Response Format Reveals the Truth about Donations to a Public Good?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(2), pages 152-166. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Brouwer, Roy, 2000. "Environmental value transfer: state of the art and future prospects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 137-152, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Kanninen Barbara J., 1995. "Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 114-125, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Edward Balistreri & Gary McClelland & Gregory Poe & William Schulze, 2001. "Can Hypothetical Questions Reveal True Values? A Laboratory Comparison of Dichotomous Choice and Open-Ended Contingent Values with Auction Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(3), pages 275-292, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Bateman, Ian J, et al, 1997. "Does Part-Whole Bias Exist? An Experimental Investigation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(441), pages 322-32, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Gary Koop, 2002. "Modelling Recreation Demand Using Choice Experiments: Climbing in Scotland," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(3), pages 449-466, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Scott, Anthony & Vick, Sandra, 1999. "Patients, Doctors and Contracts: An Application of Principal-Agent Theory to the Doctor-Patient Relationship," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 46(2), pages 111-34, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan & Robert E. Wright & Craig Bullock & Ian Simpson & Dave Parsisson & Bob Crabtree, 1998. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Nick Hanley & Jennifer Milne, . "Ethical Beliefs and Behaviour in Contingent Valuation," Working Papers Series e96/1, University of Stirling, Department of Economics.
  13. Alan Diener & Bernie O'Brien & Amiram Gafni, 1998. "Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(4), pages 313-326.
  14. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Robert Cameron Mitchell, 1995. "The Theory and Measurement of Passive Use Value," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series 95-01, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
  15. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Frykblom, Peter, 1997. "Hypothetical Question Modes and Real Willingness to Pay," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 275-287, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. John Hutton & Alan Maynard, 2000. "A nice challenge for health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 89-93.
  19. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  20. Diamond, Peter A & Hausman, Jerry A, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  21. Richard C. Ready & Jean C. Buzby & Dayuan Hu, 1996. "Differences between Continuous and Discrete Contingent Value Estimates," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(3), pages 397-411. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  22. Nick Hanley, 2001. "Cost - benefit analysis and environmental policymaking," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 19(1), pages 103-118, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  23. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  24. Ryan, Mandy & Wordsworth, Sarah, 2000. "Sensitivity of Willingness to Pay Estimates to the Level of Attributes in Discrete Choice Experiments," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 47(5), pages 504-24, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  25. Klose, Thomas, 1999. "The contingent valuation method in health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 97-123, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  26. Vivien Foster & Ian J. Bateman & David Harley, 1997. "Real And Hypothetical Willingness To Pay For Environmental Preservation: A Non-Experimental Comparison," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 48(1-3), pages 123-137. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  27. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-26, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Obinna Onwujekwe & Julia Fox-Rushby & Kara Hanson, 2005. "Inter-rater and test-retest reliability of three contingent valuation question formats in south-east Nigeria," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 529-536. [Downloadable!]
  2. Rinaldo Brau & Matteo Lippi Bruni, 2008. "Eliciting the demand for long-term care coverage: a discrete choice modelling analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 411-433. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. David Whynes & Emma Frew & Jane Wolstenholme, 2005. "Willingness-to-Pay and Demand Curves: A Comparison of Results Obtained Using Different Elicitation Formats," International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 369-386, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Zoë Philips & David K. Whynes & Mark Avis, 2006. "Testing the construct validity of willingness to pay valuations using objective information about risk and health benefit," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 195-204. [Downloadable!]
  5. Richard D. Smith, 2006. "It's not just what you do, it's the way that you do it: the effect of different payment card formats and survey administration on willingness to pay for health gain," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 281-293. [Downloadable!]
  6. Richard Cookson, 2003. "Willingness to pay methods in health care: a sceptical view," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(11), pages 891-894. [Downloadable!]
  7. Minhaj Mahmud, 2006. "Contingent Valuation of Mortality Risk Reduction in Developing Countries: A Mission Impossible?," Keele Economics Research Papers KERP 2006/01, Centre for Economic Research, Keele University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  8. Rinaldo Brau & M. Lippi Bruni & Anna Maria Pinna, 2004. "Public vs private demand for covering long term care expenditures," Working Paper CRENoS 200408, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia. [Downloadable!]
  9. Richard D. Smith, 2007. "The role of 'reference goods' in contingent valuation: should we help respondents to 'construct' their willingness to pay?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(12), pages 1319-1332. [Downloadable!]
  10. Richard D. Smith, 2007. "The relationship between reliability and size of willingness-to-pay values: a qualitative insight," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(2), pages 211-216. [Downloadable!]
  11. Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & José Gómez-Limón, 2008. "Reconsidering Heterogeneity and Aggregation Issues in Environmental Valuation: A Multi-attribute Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 551-570, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Isabell Goldberg & Jutta Roosen, 2007. "Scope insensitivity in health risk reduction studies: A comparison of choice experiments and the contingent valuation method for valuing safer food," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 123-144, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. Garming, Hildegard & Waibel, Hermann, 2006. "Willingness To Pay To Avoid Health Risks From Pesticides, A Case Study From Nicaragua," 46th Annual Conference, Giessen, Germany, October 4-6, 2006 14968, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA). [Downloadable!]
  14. Josephine Borghi, 2008. "Aggregation rules for cost-benefit analysis: a health economics perspective," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(7), pages 863-875. [Downloadable!]
  15. Hildegard Garming & Hermann Waibel, 2009. "Pesticides and farmer health in Nicaragua: a willingness-to-pay approach to evaluation," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 125-133, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Modelling Heterogeneity in Patients' Preferences for the Attributes of a General Practitioner Appointment," Working Papers 022cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The RePEc project started in 1997. Its precursor, NetEc, dates back to 1993.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-13.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.