Deriving welfare measures in discrete choice experiments: a comment to Lancsar and Savage (1)

Mandy Ryan

Health Economics, 2004, vol. 13, issue 9, 909-912

Abstract: Lancsar and Savage argue that current methods of deriving welfare estimates, using discrete choice experiments, are inconsistent with random utility and welfare theory. In this paper I show that this not the case. The general formula proposed by Small and Rosen for estimating welfare, which Lancsar and Savage claim should be used, reduces to the method used by health economists for state of the world models. The important question then becomes when are state of the world models, as opposed to multiple alternative models, appropriate? Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Date: 2004
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (19)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.869

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:13:y:2004:i:9:p:909-912

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics is currently edited by Alan Maynard, John Hutton and Andrew Jones

More articles in Health Economics from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().