IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/col/000547/020775.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Escasez de órganos: impacto del uso de opciones predeterminadas para la donación en países en vía de desarrollo

Author

Listed:
  • Paula Alejandra Algarra Saavedra3

Abstract

Para solucionar la escasez de órganos, gobiernos del mundo han optado por el uso de opciones predeterminadas, que, fundamentadas en la teoría conductual, inducen comportamientos deseados de donación cadavérica. Lo anterior, obedece a los impactos positivos que esta medida ha tenido en las tasas de donación de países desarrollados. Sin embargo, sus efectos en contextos en vía de desarrollo son desconocidos, más aún cuando se contemplan heterogeneidades. El presente estudio aporta evidencia del efecto que tiene la adopción de un sistema de opción predeterminada para donación de órganos en la tasa de donación real cadavérica de países en vía de desarrollo, a partir del estudio del caso de Colombia, un país que adoptó esta alternativa de solución con la Ley 1805 del 2016. Utilizando un panel de datos del Global Observatory on Donation and Transplantation (GODT), que comprende datos del 2012 al 2019, se realiza un ejercicio a nivel país que cuantifica el impacto de la legislación en la tasa de donación cadavérica real. Adicionalmente, el estudio se complementa con un panel de datos departamental del Instituto Nacional de Salud (INS) que estima el impacto de la legislación en la donación cadavérica real a partir del nivel de capacidad de implementación que existe al interior del país. Como resultado se obtiene que la Ley 1805 del 2016 no tuvo impacto en la tasa de donación cadavérica real. En consecuencia, las legislaciones de opción predeterminada no son infalibles. Por lo que es importante que el Gobierno nacional identifique los factores que determinan el resultado observado para formular alternativas que mitiguen la escasez de órganos. ****** To solve the organ shortage, governments worldwide have opted for opt-out, which, based on behavioral theory, induces desired deceased organ donation behaviors. This is due to the positive impact that opt-out systems have had on donation rates of developed countries. However, its effects in developing contexts are unknown, especially when heterogeneity is considered. The present study provides evidence of the effects of adopting an opt-out system for organ donation on the actual deceased organ donor rate of developing countries, based on the Colombian study case, a country that adopted this solution with Law 1805 of 2016. Using a panel of data from the Global Observatory on Donation and Transplantation (GODT), covering the years 2012 to 2019, a country-level exercise that quantifies the impact of legislation on the actual deceased organ donor rate is performed. In addition, the study is complemented by a departmental data panel from the National Institute of Health (INS) to estimate the impact of the legislation on the deceased organ donor rate based on the level of implementation capacity within the country. As a result, the Law 1805 of 2016 had no impact on the actual deceased organ donor rate. Consequently, opt-out legislations are not infallible. Therefore, the government should identify the factors that determine the observed result to formulate alternatives to mitigate the organ shortage.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula Alejandra Algarra Saavedra3, 2023. "Escasez de órganos: impacto del uso de opciones predeterminadas para la donación en países en vía de desarrollo," Documentos de trabajo 20775, Escuela de Gobierno - Universidad de los Andes.
    • Handle: RePEc:col:000547:020775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://gobierno.uniandes.edu.co/sites/default/files/books/DT/DT_96.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Abadie & Alexis Diamond & Jens Hainmueller, 2015. "Comparative Politics and the Synthetic Control Method," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(2), pages 495-510, February.
    2. Gabriel D. Carroll & James J. Choi & David Laibson & Brigitte C. Madrian & Andrew Metrick, 2009. "Optimal Defaults and Active Decisions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1639-1674.
    3. Grier, Kevin & Maynard, Norman, 2016. "The economic consequences of Hugo Chavez: A synthetic control analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 1-21.
    4. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    5. Lijphart, Arend, 1971. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 682-693, September.
    6. Sunstein,Cass R., 2020. "Behavioral Science and Public Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108972789.
    7. Abadie, Alberto & Diamond, Alexis & Hainmueller, Jens, 2010. "Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(490), pages 493-505.
    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. Daniel Albalate & Germà Bel & Ferran A. Mazaira-Font, 2020. "Ensuring Stability, Accuracy and Meaningfulness in Synthetic Control Methods: The Regularized SHAP-Distance Method," IREA Working Papers 202005, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Apr 2020.
    2. César Martinelli & Marco Vega, 2019. "The Economic Legacy of General Velasco: Long-Term Consequences of Interventionism," Revista Economía, Fondo Editorial - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, vol. 42(84), pages 102-133.
    3. Pavlik, Jamie Bologna & Jahan, Israt & Young, Andrew T., 2023. "Do longer constitutions corrupt?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Robbert Maseland & Rok Spruk, 2023. "The benefits of US statehood: an analysis of the growth effects of joining the USA," Cliometrica, Springer;Cliometric Society (Association Francaise de Cliométrie), vol. 17(1), pages 49-89, January.
    5. Monastiriotis, Vassilis & Zilic, Ivan, 2020. "The economic effects of political disintegration: Lessons from Serbia and Montenegro," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. Lattanzio, Gabriele, 2022. "Beyond religion and culture: The economic consequences of the institutionalization of sharia law," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    7. Giulio Grossi & Marco Mariani & Alessandra Mattei & Patrizia Lattarulo & Ozge Oner, 2020. "Direct and spillover effects of a new tramway line on the commercial vitality of peripheral streets. A synthetic-control approach," Papers 2004.05027, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    8. Gharehgozli, Orkideh, 2021. "An empirical comparison between a regression framework and the Synthetic Control Method," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 70-81.
    9. David Gilchrist & Thomas Emery & Nuno Garoupa & Rok Spruk, 2023. "Synthetic Control Method: A tool for comparative case studies in economic history," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 409-445, April.
    10. Daniel D. Bonneau & Joshua C. Hall & Yang Zhou, 2022. "Institutional implant and economic stagnation: a counterfactual study of Somalia," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(3), pages 483-503, March.
    11. Bibek Adhikari, 2022. "A Guide to Using the Synthetic Control Method to Quantify the Effects of Shocks, Policies, and Shocking Policies," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 67(1), pages 46-63, March.
    12. Demirci, Murat, 2023. "Youth responses to political populism: Education abroad as a step toward emigration," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 653-673.
    13. Valdivia Coria, Joab Dan & Valdivia Coria, Daney David, 2019. "Construcción de una Bolivia artificial: Efectos de la Política Económica desde 2006 [Construction of an artificial Bolivia: Effects of the Economic Policy since 2006]," MPRA Paper 96626, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Roland Zink & Javier Valdes & Jane Wuth, 2020. "Prioritizing the Chicken or Egg? Electric Vehicle Purchase and Charging Infrastructure Subsidies in Germany," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 185-198.
    15. Juan S. Mora‐Sanguinetti & Rok Spruk, 2023. "Economic effects of recent experiences of federalism: Analysis of the regionalization process in Spain," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 30-63, January.
    16. Wu, Rongxin & Tan, Zhizhou & Lin, Boqiang, 2023. "Does carbon emission trading scheme really improve the CO2 emission efficiency? Evidence from China's iron and steel industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    17. Lili Yao & J. Brandon Bolen & Claudia R. Williamson, 2021. "The effect of mass legalization on US state-level institutions: Evidence from the immigration reform and control act," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 427-463, December.
    18. Absher, Samuel & Grier, Kevin & Grier, Robin, 2020. "The economic consequences of durable left-populist regimes in Latin America," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 787-817.
    19. Daniel D. Bonneau & Joshua C. Hall, 2020. "Economic Activity, International Intervention, and Transitional Governance: A Comparative Case Study of Somalia," Working Papers 20-01, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    20. Lili Yao & J. Brandon Bolen & Claudia R. Williamson, 2022. "Are economic arguments against immigration missing the boat? The fiscal effects of the Mariel Boatlift," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 89(2), pages 305-325, October.

    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:col:000547:020775. 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: Alejandra Rojas Forero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/egandco.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.