IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Why the Econometrician is in Good Spirits – a workshop through the looking glass

Listed author(s):
  • Carl Hampus Lyttkens

This paper aims to explore the determinants of research-related quality of life (RRQoL) of econometricians in health economics. It is well-known (standard expression for not bothering to look up the references) that an extensive literature deals with the measurement and determinants of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the general population. However, if the standard neo-classical paradigm applies (self-interested, utility-maximising behaviour, etc), scientists are of course much more interested in the wellbeing of scientists than of other people. In addition to its intrinsic interest, this is an important issue for public policy. Analogously to the extra-welfarist approach in health economics (Hurley 2000), we may assume that the purpose of allocating funds to the scientific community is to maximise their RRQoL. We may safely assume that this interpretation is endorsed by the scientists in question (supplier-induced demand). While these issues are of considerable general interest, the analysis here focuses on individuals engaged in econometrics and health economics, due to the availability of a unique data set from the 16th European Workshop on Econometrics and Health Economics (cf. section 4). The analysis is based on a scientific principle established by Sellar & Yeatman (1975[1930]), who showed that “history is what you can remember.”1 This led them to such eloquent deductions as the observation (p. 83) that after the Glorious Revolution England was ruled by an orange (Williamanmary) or that the Danish conquest of England was a Good Thing as it was the cause of Alfred the Cake (p.16).2 Similarly, economics can be defined as those economic analyses that are memorable. Hence it comprises such important findings as the deadweight loss of Christmas (Waldfogel 1993)3 or that males can maximise their survival probability by becoming 185 centimetres tall or more (Fogel 1994).4 Following the Sellar-Yeatman principle, the analysis below is based on the author’s recollection from the Workshop in question. To minimise recollection bias, the first draft of the paper was composed during the very early morning flight (06.55 am) from Bergen to Copenhagen (survival analysis).5

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
File Function: Main text
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York in its series Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers with number 07/26.

in new window

Date of creation: Nov 2007
Handle: RePEc:yor:hectdg:07/26
Contact details of provider: Postal:
HEDG/HERC, Department of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom

Phone: (0)1904 323776
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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.:

in new window

  1. Jagdish Bhagwati & T. Srinivasan, 1986. "Religion as DUP activity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 49-54, January.
  2. Waldfogel, Joel, 1993. "The Deadweight Loss of Christmas," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1328-1336, December.
  3. 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.
  4. Hurley, Jeremiah, 2000. "An overview of the normative economics of the health sector," Handbook of Health Economics,in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 55-118 Elsevier.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:yor:hectdg:07/26. 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: (Jane Rawlings)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.