Do taboo trade-offs explain the difficulty in valuing health and social interventions?
Persistent anomalies in the results of willingness to pay studies, despite improvements in measurement technique, challenge the assumption in economics that all sources of value are commensurable. Two sources of incommensurability have been identified: interdimensional incommensurability, which refers to the cognitive difficulty that people encounter when trying to assign a monetary value to health; and constitutive incommensurability, which arises when some forms of trade-off are regarded as 'taboo'. In this paper we explore whether the notion of taboo trade-offs might explain some of the difficulties experienced in health-related willingness to pay studies.
Volume (Year): 38 (2009)
Issue (Month): 6 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175|
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.:
- Richard D. Smith, 2004. "The Reliability of Willingness to Pay for Changes in Health Status," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 3(1), pages 35-38.
- Shiell, Alan & Rush, Bonnie, 2003. "Can willingness to pay capture the value of altruism? An exploration of Sen's notion of commitment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 647-660, December.
- Schkade David A. & Payne John W., 1994. "How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions: A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Willingness to Pay for an Environmental Regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 88-109, January.
- Shiell, Alan & Gold, Lisa, 2002. "Contingent valuation in health care and the persistence of embedding effects without the warm glow," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 251-262, April.
- 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.
- Ajzen, Icek & Brown, Thomas C. & Rosenthal, Lori H., 1996. "Information Bias in Contingent Valuation: Effects of Personal Relevance, Quality of Information, and Motivational Orientation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-57, January.
- Klose, Thomas, 1999. "The contingent valuation method in health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 97-123, May.
- Zo� 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.
- Alan Shiell & Penelope Hawe, 2006. "Test-retest reliability of willingness to pay," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 173-178, September.
- M. R. Bhatia & J. A. Fox-Rushby, 2003. "Validity of Willingness to Pay: hypothetical versus actual payment," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(12), pages 737-740.
- Laughland, Andrew S. & Musser, Wesley N. & Musser, Lynn M., 1994. "An Experiment In Contingent Valuation And Social Desirability," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 23(1), April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:38:y:2009:i:6:p:935-939. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.