Currie Gillian R, Donaldson Cam, O'Bbrien Bernie J, Stoddart Greg L, Torrance George W, Drummond Michael F
Department of Economics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Med Decis Making. 2002 Nov-Dec;22(6):493-7. doi: 10.1177/0272989X02238301.
The authors examine a number of ways in which willingness to pay (WTP) can be defined for measurement and use in a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of a collectively funded health care program. They show how ambiguous specification of the program consequences that respondents should consider in their WTP responses can lead to problems of double counting or zero countingin a subsequent CBA. An example is whether the value of lost time from work because of poor health should be included by a CBA analyst (e.g., valued at the wage rate) as a separate cost item or whether this has already been monetized and included in respondents' WTP data. The authors highlight how differences in assumed or actual institutional structures are often ignored in measures of WTP and the consequences of this for the interpretation of WTP data.
作者探讨了为集体资助的医疗保健项目的成本效益分析（CBA）进行测量和使用而定义支付意愿（WTP）的多种方式。他们展示了在WTP回应中，受访者应考虑的项目后果的模糊规范如何在后续的CBA中导致重复计算或零计算的问题。一个例子是，由于健康不佳导致的工作时间损失的价值，CBA分析师是否应将其作为一个单独的成本项目纳入（例如，按工资率估值），或者这是否已经货币化并包含在受访者的WTP数据中。作者强调了在WTP测量中，假设的或实际的制度结构差异往往被忽视，以及这对WTP数据解释的影响。
