...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Cadernos de Saúde Pública >Welfarism and extra-welfarism: a critical overview
【24h】

Welfarism and extra-welfarism: a critical overview

机译：福利主义和超福利主义：关键概述

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Rules and principles for guiding decision-making in the health care sector have been debated for decades. Here, we present a critical appraisal of the two most important paradigms in this respect: welfarism and extra-welfarism. While the former deals with the maximization of the overall sum of individual utilities as its primary outcome, the latter has been focusing on the maximization of the overall health status. We argue that welfarism has three main problems: (1) its central idea of overall sum of individual utilities does not capture societal values decisively relevant in the context of health; (2) the use of the Potential Pareto Improvement brings an unresolvable separation between efficiency and equity; and (3) individual utility may not be a good measure in the health sector, given that individuals might value things that diminish their overall health. In turn, the extra-welfarist approach is criticized regarding four main limitations: (1) the advocated expansion of the evaluative space, moving from utility to health, may have represented in reality a narrowing of it; (2) it operates using non-explicit considerations of equity; (3) it still holds the issue of a??inability to desirea?? of unprivileged people being considered the best judges of weighing the criteria used to building the health measures; and (4) there is controversial empirical evidence about society membersa?? values that support its assumptions. Overall, both paradigms show significant weaknesses, but the debate has still been within the realm of welfare economics, and even the new approaches to resource allocation in health care systems appear to be unable to escape from these boundaries.
机译：几十年来，在医疗保健部门的指导决策的规则和原则已经讨论。在这里，我们在这方面提出了两种最重要的范例的批判性评估：福利主义和营养革命。虽然前者涉及各个公用事业总和的最大化作为其主要结果，但后者一直专注于整体健康状况的最大化。我们认为福利主义有三个主要问题：（1）其对个人公用事业总体总和的核心思想不会捕捉在健康背景下果断相关的社会价值; （2）潜在帕累托改善的使用带来了效率和权益之间的毫无特殊的分离; （3）个人效用可能不是在卫生部门的好衡量标准，因为个人可能重视减少整体健康的事情。反过来，福利人的方法是关于四个主要局限性的批评：（1）从效用转向健康的评价空间的主张扩张可能已经表示在现实中; （2）它使用非明确的股权考虑; （3）它仍然存在一个问题的问题，无法追溯到desirea ??在一个迷人的人被认为是称量用于建立健康措施的标准的最佳评委; （4）有争议的经验证据有关社会成员的实证证据？支持其假设的值。总体而言，两种范式都表现出显着的弱点，但辩论仍然是福利经济学的领域，甚至卫生保健系统中资源配置的新方法似乎无法逃离这些边界。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号