Hanly Paul, Ortega Ortega Marta, Pearce Alison, Soerjomataram Isabelle, Sharp Linda
School of Business, National College of Ireland, Mayor Street, Dublin 1, Ireland.
Applied Economics, School of Economics and Business, Complutense University of Madrid, Campus de Somosaguas, 28223, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain.
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Nov;264:113289. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113289. Epub 2020 Aug 15.
The friction cost approach (FCA) estimates the productivity costs of disease from an employer's perspective but the lack of estimates of friction periods in different countries limits its use. Our aim was to use labour market aggregates to generate two alternative estimates of the friction period for European countries and to apply the FCA to illustrate the impact on cancer-related lost productivity costs. We included thirty countries (EU 27 + the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Norway). Base-case Method 1 used annual Dutch vacancy stock and flow data (2001-2019) to estimate friction periods for this country. A regression model was employed using Dutch data and country-specific vacancy and unemployment rates to generate country-specific friction period estimates for the other 29 countries. Alternative Method 2 used country-specific newly occupied jobs as a proxy vacancy flow variable and vacancy stock data to generate friction period estimates. These were applied, within the FCA, to premature cancer mortality data (from GLOBOCAN2018) for all cancers combined for Western European countries. Costs are in €2018. Method 1 estimated friction periods in 2018 ranged from 70.8 days for Greece to 145.9 days for the Czech Republic, with a mean duration of 95.3 days. Method 2 produced a mean friction period of 80.0 days. On average, across countries, Method 2 friction periods were 15.4 days (-18.5%) shorter than Method 1 estimates. Friction period estimates over the last decade were shorter than those for 2018 reflecting lower vacancy rates. Total cancer premature mortality costs according to FCA Method 1 amounted to €1.0 billion in 2018 for Western Europe compared to €0.99 billion for Method 2. We developed two alternative - and viable - methods to estimate country-specific friction periods. These approaches will enable researchers to apply the FCA to estimate the productivity cost of diseases across Europe from an employer's perspective.
摩擦成本法（FCA）从雇主的角度估算疾病的生产力成本，但不同国家缺乏摩擦期的估算限制了其应用。我们的目的是利用劳动力市场总量数据得出欧洲国家摩擦期的两种替代估算值，并应用摩擦成本法来说明对癌症相关生产力损失成本的影响。我们纳入了30个国家（欧盟27国+英国、瑞士和挪威）。基准案例方法1使用荷兰年度职位空缺存量和流量数据（2001 - 2019年）来估算该国的摩擦期。利用荷兰数据以及各国特定的职位空缺率和失业率建立回归模型，以得出其他29个国家特定的摩擦期估算值。替代方法2使用各国特定的新入职岗位作为代理空缺流量变量以及职位空缺存量数据来得出摩擦期估算值。这些估算值在摩擦成本法中应用于西欧国家所有癌症合并的过早癌症死亡率数据（来自GLOBOCAN2018）。成本以2018年欧元计。方法1估算的2018年摩擦期从希腊的70.8天到捷克共和国的145.9天不等，平均时长为95.3天。方法2得出的平均摩擦期为80.0天。总体而言，各国中方法2的摩擦期比方法1的估算值短15.4天（-18.5%）。过去十年的摩擦期估算值比2018年的短，这反映出职位空缺率较低。根据摩擦成本法方法1，2018年西欧因癌症过早死亡造成的总成本达10亿欧元，而方法2为9.9亿欧元。我们开发了两种替代且可行的方法来估算各国特定的摩擦期。这些方法将使研究人员能够从雇主角度应用摩擦成本法来估算欧洲各地疾病的生产力成本。
