IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea01/20717.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Utility-Theoretic Approach to Measuring Changes in US Rural Residents' Access to Hospital Services from 1980 to 1999

Author

Listed:
  • McNamara, Paul E.

Abstract

Questions of access to hospital services figure centrally in rural-health policy debates, yet few analyses exist that measure the importance of changes in hospital access in rural areas of the US. Of the studies that measure changes in access to hospital services over time in the literature, none use economic theory as the framework for the analysis. This paper proposes an economic approach based upon revealed preferences to measuring access to hospital services and quantifies the value of changes in hospital access over the period 1980 to 1999 for residents in rural counties in the US. Welfare measures are constructed for the years 1980 and 1999 for rural residents in all the rural counties of the US. On average the lowest levels of hospital access are found in the counties of the West, while Eastern US counties have better access to hospitals in comparison. The changes in hospital-consumer welfare indicate that over the period 1980 to 1999, access to hospital services has declined for rural US residents.

Suggested Citation

  • McNamara, Paul E., 2001. "A Utility-Theoretic Approach to Measuring Changes in US Rural Residents' Access to Hospital Services from 1980 to 1999," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20717, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20717
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.20717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/20717/files/sp01mc03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.20717?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1982. "Applied Welfare Analysis with Qualitative Response Models," CUDARE Working Papers 7160, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard Batley & Thijs Dekker, 2019. "The Intuition Behind Income Effects of Price Changes in Discrete Choice Models, and a Simple Method for Measuring the Compensating Variation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 337-366, September.
    2. Ginés de Rus & Javier Campos & Daniel Graham & M. Pilar Socorro & Jorge Valido, 2020. "Evaluación Económica de Proyectos y Políticas de Transporte: Metodología y Aplicaciones. Parte 1: Metodología para el análisis coste-beneficio de proyectos y políticas de transporte," Working Papers 2020-11, FEDEA.
    3. Heng Z. Chen & Frank Lupi & John P. Hoehn, 1999. "An Empirical Assessment of Multinomial Probit and Logit Models for Recreation Demand," Chapters, in: Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling (ed.), Valuing Recreation and the Environment, chapter 5, pages 141-162, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Nunes, Luis C. & Cunha-e-Sa, Maria & Ducla-Soares, Maria, 1998. "Testing for rationality: the case of discrete choice data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 255-261, September.
    5. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    6. Ortega, David L. & Waldman, Kurt B. & Richardson, Robert B. & Clay, Daniel C. & Snapp, Sieglinde, 2016. "Sustainable Intensification and Farmer Preferences for Crop System Attributes: Evidence from Malawi’s Central and Southern Regions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 139-151.
    7. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Font, Antoni Riera, 2009. "Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2743-2750, September.
    8. Hicks, Robert L. & Holland, Daniel S. & Kuriyama, Peter T. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2020. "Choice sets for spatial discrete choice models in data rich environments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    9. Tudor, Lynne G. & Besedin, Elena Y. & Fisher, Michael & Smith, Stuart, 1999. "Economic Analysis Of Environmental Regulations: Application Of The Random Utility Model To Recreational Benefit Assessment For The Mp&M Effluent Guideline," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21630, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Deely, J. & Hynes, S. & Curtis, J., 2019. "Are objective data a suitable replacement for subjective data in site choice analysis?," Working Papers 309602, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    11. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    12. Joan Mogas & Pere Riera & Raul Brey, 2009. "Combining Contingent Valuation and Choice Experiments. A Forestry Application in Spain," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(4), pages 535-551, August.
    13. Donna Dosman & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2006. "Combining Stated and Revealed Preference Data to Construct an Empirical Examination of Intrahousehold Bargaining," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 15-34, March.
    14. Chia-Yu Yeh & Timothy Haab & Brent Sohngen, 2006. "Modeling Multiple-Objective Recreation Trips with Choices Over Trip Duration and Alternative Sites," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(2), pages 189-209, June.
    15. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa, 2013. "Preference discontinuity in choice experiment: Determinants and implications," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 138-145.
    16. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    17. Needelman, Michael S. & Kealy, Mary Jo, 1995. "Recreational Swimming Benefits Of New Hampshire Lake Water Quality Policies: An Application Of A Repeated Discrete Choice Model," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-10, April.
    18. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Buszko-Briggs, Malgorzata & Hanley, Nick, 2009. "Valuing changes in forest biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2910-2917, October.
    19. Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly & Richard Batley, 2018. "Revisiting consistency with random utility maximisation: theory and implications for practical work," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(2), pages 181-204, March.
    20. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2013. "Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1148-1156.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Health Economics and Policy;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20717. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.