Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Health Care Based on the Capability Approach

Abstract

It is well known that Sen’s capability approach and preference utilitarianism have different distributional values. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how Sen’s capability approach might be operationalised for allocation decisions and cost-effectiveness analysis in health care. The paper identifies several requirements for measuring health or well-being in line with the capability approach. Among them is the need for objective assessments of capabilities. This paper also shows that from the perspective of the capability approach a portion of productivity changes are irrelevant for allocation decisions.

Zusammenfassung

Bekanntermaßen haben der Capability Approach nach Sen und der Präferenzutilitarismus unterschiedliche Verteilungsimplikationen. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es zu diskutieren, wie der Capability Approach nach Sen für Allokationsentscheidungen und Kosten-Nutzen-Analysen im Gesundheitswesen operationalisiert werden kann. Es werden mehrere Anforderungen an die Messung von Gesundheit und Wohlbefinden nach dem Capability Approach identifiziert. Dazu zählt die objektive Messung von Capabilities (Verwirklichungschancen). Diese Arbeit zeigt auch, dass aus Sicht des Capability Approach ein Teil der Produktivitätsgewinne irrelevant für Allokationsentscheidungen ist.

Key words

resource allocation - cost-effectiveness - capabilities - utilitarianism

Schlüsselwörter

Ressourcenallokation - Kosten-Effektivität - Capabilities - Utilitarismus

• References

• 1 Olsen JA. Theories of justice and their implications for priority setting in health care. Journal of Health Economics 1997; 16: 625-639
• 2 Wagstaff A. QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off. Journal of Health Economics 1991; 10: 21-41
• 3 Williams A. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the ‘fair innings’ argument. Health Economics 1997; 6: 117-132
• 4 Nord E, Pinto JL, Richardson J et al. Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. Health Economics 1999; 8: 25-39
• 5 Anand P. QALYs and capabilities: a comment on Cookson. Health Economics 2005; 14: 1283-1286
• 6 Cookson R. QALYs and the capability approach. Health Economics 2005; 14: 817-829
• 7 Cookson R. QALYs and capabilities: a response to Anand. Health Economics 2005; 14: 1287-1289
• 8 Mooney G. Communitarian claims and community capabilities: furthering priority setting?. Social Science Medicine 2005; 60: 247-255
• 9 Ruger JP. Health, capability, and justice: toward a new paradigm of health ethics, policy and law. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 2006; 15: 102-182
• 10 Coast J, Flynn TN, Natarajan L et al. Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people. Social Science & Medicine 2008; 67: 874-882
• 11 Rawls J. A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1971
• 12 Sen AK. Equality of what?. In: McMurrin S. (ed.). Tanner Lectures on Human Values. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1980
• 13 Sen AK. The standard of living. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987
• 14 Sen AK. On the foundations of welfare economics: utility, capability, and practical reason. In: Farina F, Hahn F, Vannucci S. (eds.). Ethics, rationality, and economic behaviour. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1996
• 15 Coast J, Smith RD, Lorgelly P. Welfarism, extra-welfarism and capability: the spread of ideas in health economics. Social Science & Medicine 2008; 67: 1190-1198
• 16 Sen AK. Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999
• 17 Lelkes O. Knowing what is good for you. Empirical analysis of personal preferences and the “objective good”. Journal of Socio-Economics 2006; 35: 285-307
• 18 Sen AK. Inequality reexamined. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1992
• 19 Sen AK. The idea of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2009
• 20 Sen AK. Markets and freedoms: achievements and limitations of the market mechanism in promoting individual freedoms. Oxford Economic Papers 1993; 45: 519-541
• 21 Sen AK. Why health equity?. Health Economics 2002; 11: 659-666
• 22 Sen AK. Elements of a theory of human rights. Philosophy and Public Affairs 2004; 32: 315-356
• 23 Gandjour A. Mutual dependency between capabilities and functionings in Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Social Choice and Welfare 2008; 31: 345-350
• 24 Chakraborty A. On a (non-trivial) difference between Sen and Nussbaum on the capability approach. 3^rd Conference on the Capability Approach. Pavia: University of Pavia; 2003
• 25 Salais R. Social exclusion and capability. http://www.idhe.ens-cachan.fr/ric0701.pdf Accessed 15.05.07
• 26 Nussbaum MC. Women and human development: a capabilities approach. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000
• 27 Nussbaum MC. Frontiers of justice: disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2006
• 28 Nussbaum MC. Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics 2003; 9: 33-59
• 29 Torrance GW. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Services Research 1972; 7: 118-133
• 30 Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 1976; 10: 129-136
• 31 Sen AK. Justice: means versus freedom. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19: 111-121
• 32 Culyer AJ. The normative economics of health care finance and provision. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 1989; 5: 34-58
• 33 Mooney G, Russell E. Equity in health care: the need for a new economics paradigm?. In: Scott A, Maynard A, Elliott R. (eds.). Advances in Health Economics. Chichester: Wiley; 2003
• 34 Brazier J, Akehurst R, Brennan A et al. Should patients have a greater role in valuing health states?. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2005; 4: 201-208
• 35 Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Medical Care 2002; 40: 113-128
• 36 Singer P. A response to Martha Nussbaum. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. 2002
• 37 Hamlin A. Welfare. In: Goodin RE, Pettit P. (eds.). A companion to contemporary political philosophy. (second edition). Oxford: Blackwell; 2007
• 38 Harsanyi JC. A preference-based theory of well-being and a rule utilitarian theory of morality. In: Leinfellner W, Köhler E. (eds.). Game theory, experience, rationality: foundations of social sciences, economics and ethics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1998
• 39 Lewinsohn-Zamir D. The objectivity of well-being and the objectives of property. New York University Law Review 2003; 78: 1669-1754
• 40 Harsanyi JC. Morality and the theory of rational behavior. Social Research 1977; 44: 623-656
• 41 Pliskin JS, Shepard DS, Weinstein MC. Utility functions for life years and health status. Operations Research 1980; 28: 206-224
• 42 Coast J, Smith R, Lorgelly P. Should the capability approach be applied in health economics?. Health Economics 2008; 17: 667-670
• 43 Alkire S. The capability approach to the quality of life. Working paper prepared for the Working Group „Quality of Life” 2008 Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress
• 44 Dworkin R. Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1977
• 45 Ng YK. Utility, informed preference, or happiness?. Social Choice and Welfare 1999; 16: 197-216
• 46 Johansson PO. Altruism in cost-benefit analysis. Environmental and Resource Economics 1992; 2: 605-613
• 47 Sen AK. Capability and well-being. In: Nussbaum MC, Sen AK. (eds.). The quality of life. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993
• 48 Davis JB. The theory of the individual in economics: identity and values. London: Routledge; 2003