Eliciting Preferences for Collectively Financed Health Programmes: the Willingness to Assign Approach
AbstractImproving public involvement in health system decision making stands as a primary goal in health systems reform. However, still limited evidence is found on how best to elicit preferences for health care programs. This paper examines a contingent choice technique to elicit preferences among health programs so called, willingness to assign (WTAS). Moreover, we elicited contingent rankings as well as the willingness to pay extra taxes for comparative purposes. We argue that WTAS reveals relative (monetary-based) values of a set of competing public programmes under a hypothetical healthcare budget assessment. Experimental evidence is reported from a deliberative empirical study valuing ten health programmes in the context of the Catalan Health Service. Evidence from a our experimental study reveals that preferences are internally more consistent and slightly less affected by preference reversals as compared to values revealed from the willingness to pay (WTP) extra taxes approach. Consistent with prior studies, we find that the deliberative approach helped to avoid possible misunderstandings. Interestingly, although programmes promoting health received the higher relative valuation, those promoting other health benefits also ranked highly.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 117.
Length: 24 pages
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Espai de Recerca en Economia, Facultat de CiÃ¨ncies EconÃ²miques. Tinent Coronel Valenzuela, Num 1-11 08034 Barcelona. Spain.
Web page: http://www.ere.ub.es
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Joan Costa-Font & Joan Rovira, 2005. "Eliciting preferences for collectively financed health programmes: the 'willingness to assign' approach," Applied Economics, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 37(14), pages 1571-1583.
- D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
- H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
- I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
- D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-07-04 (All new papers)
- NEP-DCM-2004-07-04 (Discrete Choice Models)
- NEP-EDU-2004-07-04 (Education)
- NEP-EXP-2004-07-04 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-HEA-2004-07-04 (Health Economics)
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.:
- Cookson, Richard, 2000. "Incorporating psycho-social considerations into health valuation: an experimental study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 369-401, May.
- M. Common & I. Reid & R. Blamey, 1997. "Do existence values for cost benefit analysis exist?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 225-238, March.
- Cookson, Richard & Dolan, Paul, 1999. "Public views on health care rationing: a group discussion study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 63-74, September.
- Phil Shackley & Simon Dixon, 2000. "Using contingent valuation to elicit public preferences for water fluoridation," Applied Economics, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 32(6), pages 777-787.
- Donaldson, Cam, 1990. "Willingness to pay for publicly-provided goods : A Possible Measure of Benefit?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 103-118, June.
- Shackley, Phil & Donaldson, Cam, 2002. "Should we use willingness to pay to elicit community preferences for health care?: New evidence from using a 'marginal' approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 971-991, November.
- Paul Dolan & Jan Abel Olsen & Paul Menzel & Jeff Richardson, 2003. "An inquiry into the different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(7), pages 545-551.
- Nord, Erik & Richardson, Jeff & Street, Andrew & Kuhse, Helga & Singer, Peter, 1995. "Maximizing health benefits vs egalitarianism: An Australian survey of health issues," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1429-1437, November.
- Valentina Zigante, 2011. "Assessing Welfare Effects of the European Choice Agenda: The case of health care in the United Kingdom," Europe in Question Discussion Paper Series of the London School of Economics (LEQs) 5, London School of Economics / European Institute.
- Valentina Zigante, 2011. "Assessing Welfare Effects of the European Choice Agenda: The case of health care in the United Kingdom," LEQS â LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 35, European Institute, LSE.
- Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39.
- Rinaldo Brau & Matteo Lippi Bruni & Anna Maria Pinna, 2010. "Public versus private demand for covering long-term care expenditures," Applied Economics, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 42(28), pages 3651-3668.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Espai de Recerca en Economia).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.