IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sus/susewp/0719.html

Attitudes Towards Public Health Spending: The Case of the National Health Service in the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Dolton

    (Department of Economics, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK
    National Institute of Economic and Social Research, London, UK
    IZA, Bonn, Germany
    CESifo, Munich, Germany)

  • Mehmet Kutluay

    (Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Richard S.J. Tol

    (Department of Economics, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK
    CESifo, Munich, Germany
    Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

Abstract

The funding of the NHS in the UK is in perennial crisis. In times of austerity it is difficult to advocate extra health spending from tax revenue. Our central questions are: how much extra do people think should be spent on the NHS; how much extra tax might they be willing to pay; or to what extent would they like to see public money redistributed away from other public services towards the NHS? We answer these questions using a large survey of the UK general public. On average the answers to these questions are $279, $176 and $33 per person, per year, respectively. We examine people's appetite for other measures to increase spending on patients and find that their spending preferences are somewhat related to their own health but strongly related to their age, gender, religious beliefs, political sentiments, and views on the structure of the NHS.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Dolton & Mehmet Kutluay & Richard S.J. Tol, 2019. "Attitudes Towards Public Health Spending: The Case of the National Health Service in the United Kingdom," Working Paper Series 0719, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:sus:susewp:0719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=wps-07-2019.pdf&site=24
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard S.J. Tol & Peter Dolton, 2016. "A survey of the UK population on public policy," Working Paper Series 08416, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Habibov, Nazim & Cheung, Alex & Auchynnikava, Alena, 2017. "Does social trust increase willingness to pay taxes to improve public healthcare? Cross-sectional cross-country instrumental variable analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 25-34.
    3. Donaldson, Cam, 1990. "Willingness to pay for publicly-provided goods : A Possible Measure of Benefit?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 103-118, June.
    4. John E. Anderson, 2017. "Trust in Government and Willingness to Pay Taxes in Transition Countries," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 59(1), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Grossman, Michael, 1972. "On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 223-255, March-Apr.
    6. Danyliv, Andriy & Groot, Wim & Gryga, Irena & Pavlova, Milena, 2014. "Willingness and ability to pay for physician services in six Central and Eastern European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 72-82.
    7. Murphy, Ryan O. & Ackermann, Kurt A. & Handgraaf, Michel J. J., 2011. "Measuring Social Value Orientation," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(8), pages 771-781, December.
    8. Ryan O. Murphy & Kurt A. Ackerman & Michel J. J. Handgraaf, 2011. "Measuring social value orientation," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(8), pages 771-781, December.
    9. Tambor, Marzena & Pavlova, Milena & Rechel, Bernd & Golinowska, Stanisława & Sowada, Christoph & Groot, Wim, 2014. "Willingness to pay for publicly financed health care services in Central and Eastern Europe: Evidence from six countries based on a contingent valuation method," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 193-201.
    10. Richard S.J. Tol & Peter Dolton, 2016. "A survey of the UK population on public policy," Working Paper Series 8416, Department of Economics, University of Sussex.
    11. Peter Dolton, 2017. "Is NHS funding in Crisis?," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) General Election Briefings, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, issue 5, May.
    12. 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, November.
    13. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    14. Nazim Habibov & Alex Cheung, 2018. "The contextual‐level effects of social trust on health in transitional countries: Instrumental variable analysis of 26 countries," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 225-234, January.
    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. Peter Dolton & Richard S.J. Tol, 2019. "Correlates of Social Value Orientation: Evidence from a Large Sample of the UK Population," Working Paper Series 0119, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Monica Novackova & Richard S.J. Tol, 2018. "Climate Change Awareness and Willingness to Pay for its Mitigation: Evidence from the UK," Working Paper Series 0318, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    3. Parco, James E. & Murphy, Ryan O., 2013. "Resistance to truthful revelation in bargaining: Persistent bid shading and the play of dominated strategies," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 154-170.
    4. Antonio M. Espin & Francisco Reyes-Pereira & Luis F. Ciria, 2017. "Organizations should know their people: A behavioral economics approach," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 1(S), pages 41-48, November.
    5. Hippel, Svenja & Hillenbrand, Adrian, 2018. "Strategic Inattention in Product Search," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181510, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    6. Chorus, Caspar G., 2015. "Models of moral decision making: Literature review and research agenda for discrete choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 69-85.
    7. Murnighan, J. Keith & Wang, Long, 2016. "The social world as an experimental game," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 80-94.
    8. Jürgen Fleiß, 2015. "Merit norms in the ultimatum game: an experimental study of the effect of merit on individual behavior and aggregate outcomes," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 389-406, June.
    9. van Winden, Frans, 2023. "The informational affective tie mechanism: on the role of uncertainty, context, and attention in caring," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    11. Judith Kas & David J. Hardisty & Michel J. J. Handgraaf, 2021. "Steady steps versus sudden shifts: Cooperation in (a)symmetric linear and step-level social dilemmas," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(1), pages 142-164, January.
    12. Maxime Perodaud & Michela Chessa, 2026. "Hey, what did you expect ? Confirmation bias in credence goods markets: Theoretical and experimental analyses," Post-Print hal-05441370, HAL.
    13. Christoph Engel & Paul A. M. Van Lange, 2021. "Social mindfulness is normative when costs are low, but rapidly declines with increases in costs," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 290-322, March.
    14. Quement, Mark T. Le & Marcin, Isabel, 2020. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 449-468.
    15. Carlos A. de Matos Fernandes & Dieko M. Bakker & Jacob Dijkstra, 2022. "Assessing the test-retest reliability of the social value orientation slider measure," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(1), pages 31-49, January.
    16. Masters-Waage, Theodore C. & Nai, Jared & Reb, Jochen & Sim, Samantha & Narayanan, Jayanth & Tan, Noriko, 2021. "Going far together by being here now: Mindfulness increases cooperation in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 189-205.
    17. Richard S.J. Tol & Peter Dolton, 2016. "A survey of the UK population on public policy," Working Paper Series 8416, Department of Economics, University of Sussex.
    18. Halko, Marja-Liisa & Lappalainen, Olli & Sääksvuori, Lauri, 2021. "Do non-choice data reveal economic preferences? Evidence from biometric data and compensation-scheme choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 87-104.
    19. repec:grz:wpsses:2017-01 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2021. "Nonverbal content and trust: An experiment on digital communication," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1517-1532, October.
    21. Janet Hua Jiang & Peter Norman & Daniela Puzzello & Bruno Sultanum & Randall Wright, 2024. "Is Money Essential? An Experimental Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 132(9), pages 2972-2998.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:sus:susewp:0719. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsusuk.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.