In defence of societal sovereignty: a comment on Nyman 'the inclusion of survivor consumption in CUA'
Whether to include or exclude consumption costs and costs of unrelated illnesses in economic evaluation is not a technical issue which may be answered by reference to individuals alone and the consistency of the treatment of individual costs and benefits. In the context of a publicly funded health service the relevant costs and benefits may differ from those normally included in evaluation studies. Specifically, the social welfare function is likely to exclude benefits which would result in preferential care for wealthier members of society. But this conclusion must be established by analysis of social, not individual, values. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Volume (Year): 15 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749|
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.:
- Olsen, Jan Abel & Richardson, Jeff, 1999. "Production gains from health care: what should be included in cost-effectiveness analyses?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 17-26, July.
- Nord, Erik & Richardson, Jeff & Street, Andrew & Kuhse, Helga & Singer, Peter, 1995. "Who cares about cost? Does economic analysis impose or reflect social values?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 79-94, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:15:y:2006:i:3:p:311-313. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.