As was remarked above one of the principal reasons for the lack of impact of C.B.A. in health care is that decision-makers in health have tended, with some considerable justification, to scorn the ‘man as a machine’ type of valuation. This, possibly more than any other reason, has resulted in a disillusionment with C.B.A. as applied to the allocation of resources within the health sector. Economists operating in that sector—and they remain a small and relatively ineffectual band (at least at the level of their impact on decision-making)—have significantly failed as yet to improve upon the ‘human capital’ valuation approach. What does seem central to the issue of cost benefit analysis having any real impact in the health sector is that, as in all areas of life saving, until economists can improve upon the methodology of valuation it is unlikely that health decision-makers will look to economists for help and guidance in resource allocation questions, except of course where essentially operations research techniques or cost-effectiveness studies can be of some help.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Klarman, H. E., Syphilis control programs. In Measuring Benefits of Government Investments, ed. R. Dorfman, Brookings Institute, Washington (1965)Google Scholar
- 3.Weisbrod, B. A., Economics of Public Health, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia (1961)Google Scholar
- 4.Rice, D. P., and Cooper, B. S., The economic value of human life, Amer. J. Public Health, 57, No. 11, 1954 (1967)Google Scholar
- 5.Culyer, A. J., Lavers, R., and Williams, A., Social indicators—health. In Social Trends, HMSO, London (1971)Google Scholar