Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The economic benefits of health and prevention in a high-income country: the example of Germany

Contents:

Author Info

  • Suhrcke, Marc
  • Urban, Dieter M.
  • Moesgaard Iburg, Kim
  • Schwappach, David
  • Boluarte, Till
  • McKee, Martin

Abstract

This paper complements the current health policy debate, which is largely confined to the cost aspects of health systems, by considering explicitly the potential economic benefits of investing in health in general and via - chiefly primary - prevention. While concerns about high and rising health care costs are justified, we see a pressing need to also measure the benefits, ultimately enabling a complete economic assessment of the socially optimal level of resources for health. Despite the use of Germany as our point of reference, our approach and findings likely apply to a wider set of European highincome countries. Using new and already existing data, we find that in sheer health terms Germany has a lot to gain from more and better illness prevention. Assuming part of this existing burden can be reduced via effective preventive interventions, we find that the resulting economic benefits - expressed in people's willingness to pay for a reduction in mortality risk - would be substantial. We also gather Germany-specific evidence to suggest that the existing burden of ill health - whether caused by lack of prevention or treatment - negatively impacts a number of important economic outcomes at the individual and macro-economic level. Referring to work carried out in parallel to this project, we find that a number of cost-effective, primary preventive interventions exist to tackle part of the avoidable disease burden. Yet we note a deficit of economic evaluations, in particular in non-clinical interventions - a finding that underlines the role of government in the production of research on specifically non-clinical prevention. In light of the market failures discussed, from an economic perspective the role of government not only consists of research, but also - surprisingly to many - extends to actual interventions to address the health behaviour-related determinants of chronic disease. With the stakes as high and the economic justification for action in place, the case for scaling up preventive efforts in Germany, backed up by solid epidemiological and economic research, is hard to deny. -- Die vorliegende Studie ergänzt die gegenwärtige gesundheitspolitische Debatte, die sich vorwiegend auf Kostenaspekte des Gesundheitswesens konzentriert, indem sie den potentiellen ökonomischen Nutzen von Gesundheitsinvestitionen im allgemeinen und (Primär-)Prävention im besonderen hervorhebt. Auch wenn die Sorge um hohe und steigende Kosten des Gesundheitswesens berechtigt ist, bleibt die Notwendigkeit, auch den Nutzen der Gesundheitsausgaben zu erfassen, um somit zu einer ökonomisch vollständigen Einschätzung des sozial optimalen Niveaus der Gesundheitsausgaben zu gelangen. Trotz des Fokus auf Deutschland sind unser Ansatz und die Ergebnisse auch auf andere Mitgliedsländer der EU übertragbar. Wir zeigen anhand neuer und schon bekannter Daten, dass der Spielraum für Gesundheitsverbesserungen, vorwiegend durch Prävention, in Deutschland erheblich ist. Der ökonomische Nutzen - gemessen an der Zahlungsbereitschaft der Bevölkerung - der durch Reduktion eines Teils dieser Krankheitslast mittels Interventionen erzielt werden kann, ist nach unseren Berechnungen beachtlich. Darüber hinaus zeigen mehrere Studien, wie die aktuell gegebene Krankheitslast, ob durch einen Mangel an Prävention oder Versorgung verursacht, eine Reihe relevanter ökonomischer Grössen auf individueller und gesamtwirtschaftlicher Ebene beeinträchtigt. Wie eine parallel durchgeführte Studie der Autoren ergab, existieren auch eine Reihe kosten-effektiver Interventionen im Bereich der primären Prävention. Dennoch bestehen noch Lücken in der ökonomischen Bewertung insbesondere nicht-klinischer Interventionen - ein Ergebnis, das die Rolle des Staates in der Evaluation dieser Interventionen unterstreicht. Aufgrund von Marktversagen in einigen relevanten Bereichen besteht eine ökonomische Rechtfertigung für staatliches Handeln nicht nur im Bereich der Forschung, sondern - überraschend für manche - auch im Bereich der (Primär-)Prävention der nicht-ansteckenden und mit dem individuellen Gesundheitsverhalten verbundenen Krankheiten. Aufgrund des in diesem Papier dokumentierten hohen gesundheitlichen und ökonomischen Nutzens sowie der ökonomischen Rechtfertigung der Rolle des Staates kann das Argument für eine Verstärkung der Prävention in Deutschland nur schwer bestritten werden.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/47434/1/535046014.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB) in its series Discussion Papers, Research Group Public Health with number SP I 2007-302.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbhea:spi2007302

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin, Germany
Phone: ++49 - 30 - 25491 - 0
Fax: ++49 - 30 - 25491 - 684
Email:
Web page: http://www.wzb.eu/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. John Cawley & Markus M. Grabka & Dean R. Lillard, 2005. "A Comparison of the Relationship between Obesity and Earnings in the U.S. and Germany," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 125(1), pages 119-129.
  2. Laurie J. Goldsmith & Brian Hutchison & Jeremiah Hurley, 2006. "Economic Evaluation Across the Four Faces of Prevention: A Canadian Perspective," Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series 2006-01, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
  3. David M. Cutler & Edward L. Glaeser & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2003. "Why Have Americans Become More Obese?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1994, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  4. Xavier Sala-I-Martin & Gernot Doppelhofer & Ronald I. Miller, 2004. "Determinants of Long-Term Growth: A Bayesian Averaging of Classical Estimates (BACE) Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 813-835, September.
  5. Joaquim Oliveira Martins & Frédéric Gonand & Pablo Antolín & Christine de la Maisonneuve & Kwang-Yeol Yoo, 2005. "The Impact of Ageing on Demand, Factor Markets and Growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 420, OECD Publishing.
  6. Schmidhuber, Josef, 2004. "The Growing Global Obesity Problem: Some Policy Options to Address It," eJADE: electronic Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, Food and Agriculture Organization, Agricultural and Development Economics Division, vol. 1(2).
  7. Schaffner, Sandra & Spengler, Hannes, 2005. "Der Einfluss unbeobachteter Heterogenität auf kompensatorische Lohndifferentiale und den Wert eines Statistischen Lebens: Eine mikroökonometrische Parallelanalyse mit IABS und SOEP," Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics 36800, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute of Economics (VWL).
  8. Michael Lechner & Rosalia Vazquez-Alvarez, 2003. "The Effect of Disability on Labour Market Outcomes in Germany: Evidence from Matching," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2003 2003-20, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
  9. Marc Suhrcke & Dieter M. Urban, 2006. "Are Cardiovascular Diseases Bad for Economic Growth?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1845, CESifo Group Munich.
  10. Huber, Hélène & Grignon, Michel & Dormont, Brigitte, 2006. "Health expenditure growth : reassessing the threat of ageing," Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine 123456789/3881, Paris Dauphine University.
  11. O'Donoghue, Ted & Rabin, Matthew, 2006. "Optimal sin taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 1825-1849, November.
  12. Mishan, E J, 1971. "Evaluation of Life and Limb: A Theoretical Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(4), pages 687-705, July-Aug..
  13. Case, Anne & Fertig, Angela & Paxson, Christina, 2005. "The lasting impact of childhood health and circumstance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 365-389, March.
  14. Goldman Dana P & Cutler David M & Shang Baoping & Joyce Geoffrey F, 2006. "The Value of Elderly Disease Prevention," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-29, January.
  15. Sikandar Siddiqui, 1997. "The impact of health on retirement behaviour: empirical evidence from West Germany," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 425-438.
  16. Beate Sander & Rito Bergemann, 2003. "Economic burden of obesity and its complications in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 248-253, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbhea:spi2007302. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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