๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Discounting costs and effects: a reconsideration

โœ Scribed by Ben A. Van Hout


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1998
Tongue
English
Weight
97 KB
Volume
7
Category
Article
ISSN
1057-9230

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


Using a simple societal utility function-giving equal weight to current and future generations -it is concluded that costs need to be discounted on the basis of the expected increase in income and the marginal utility of consumption, and that effects need to be discounted on the basis of the expected increase in health and the marginal utility of health. It is derived that both rates need to be equal when assuming a kind of perfect market, where growth rates are determined by the societal utility function. It is argued that this is an extremely heroic assumption and that different discount rates may be needed. Additionally, the traditional 'inconsistency arguments' of Weinstein and Stason and of Keeler and Cretin are reconsidered. Within the context presented earlier, the first inconsistency only emerges when a growth equilibrium is assumed, reinforcing the arguments put forward before. The Keeler and Cretin paradox is reconsidered by showing that absolutely no paradox emerges when programs are not supposed to stop after a year but are supposed to continue indefinitely. The conclusion is drawn that non-believers in market mechanisms assuring an optimal social policy, need to reconsider the use of their discount rates.


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Discounting for health effects in costโ€“b
โœ Hugh Gravelle; Dave Smith ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2001 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 118 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

## Abstract When health effects can be valued in monetary terms, as in costโ€“benefit analysis, they should be discounted at the same rate as costs. If health effects are measured in quantities (e.g. quality adjusted life years) as in costโ€effectiveness analysis (CEA) and the value of health effects

DISCOUNTING HEALTH AND COST-EFFECTIVENES
โœ James K. Hammitt ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2011 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 61 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

## SUMMARY Nord (2011) criticizes standard arguments which assert that consistency requires that future health benefits must be discounted at the same rate as future costs in costโ€effectiveness analysis (CEA). He suggests these arguments are misguided because they require transitivity of preference

Discounting and cost-effectiveness in NI
โœ Karl Claxton; Mark Sculpher; Anthony Culyer; Chris McCabe; Andrew Briggs; Ron Ak ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2005 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 77 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

## Abstract Brouwer and colleagues [1] argue that the reasons for specifying an equal discount rate for health outcomes and costs in the recent guidance on methods of technology appraisal issued by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) [2] is both opaque and wrong. They argue that a

Social discounting and delay discounting
โœ Howard Rachlin; Bryan A. Jones ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2008 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 150 KB