Deliberation Cost as a Foundation for Behavioral Economics
نویسنده
چکیده
Introduction What is behavioral economics? Why is the word behavioral necessary? Why is the word economics not sufficient? So much research could fall under the umbrella of behavioral economics that the description may not have much meaning. What distinguishes behavioral economic research? The thesis explored here is that “deliberation cost” a distinguishing feature upon which behavioral economics can be founded as a useful field of economics.
منابع مشابه
Health Technology Assessment: Global Advocacy and Local Realities; Comment on “Priority Setting for Universal Health Coverage: We Need Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes, Not Just More Evidence on Cost-Effectiveness”
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) can help countries attain and sustain universal health coverage (UHC), as long as it is context-specific and considered within deliberative processes at the country level. Institutionalising robust deliberative processes requires significant time and resources, however, and countries often begin by demanding evidence (including local CEA evidence as well as evi...
متن کاملToward a neo-Darwinian synthesis of neoclassical and behavioral economics
There is a schism within economics between the neoclassical and behavioral schools. A primary cause of the behavioral ascent is the experimental evidence of deviations between actual behavior and the neoclassical prediction of behavior. While behavioral scholars have documented these “anomalies,” they have made little progress explaining the origin of such behavior. This paper proposes a biolog...
متن کاملHTA – Algorithm or Process?; Comment on “Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy”
Daniels, Porteny and Urrutia et al make a good case for the idea that that public decisions ought to be made not only “in the light of” evidence but also “on the basis of” budget impact, financial protection and equity. Health technology assessment (HTA) should, they say, be accordingly expanded to consider matters additional to safety and cost-effectiveness. They also complain that most HTA re...
متن کاملMoving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
Background The accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework defines 4 conditions for legitimate healthcare coverage decision processes: Relevance, Publicity, Appeals, and Enforcement. The aim of this study was to reflect on how the diverse features of decision-making processes can be aligned with A4R conditions to guide decisio...
متن کاملAn Experimental Study of Jury Deliberation
We study the e¤ects of deliberation on collective decisions. In a series of experiments, we vary groupspreference distributions (between common and conicting interests) and the institutions by which decisions are reached (simple majority, two-thirds majority, and unanimity). When deliberation is prohibited, di¤erent institutions generate signi cantly di¤erent outcomes, tracking the theoretica...
متن کامل