Estimating the value of democracy relative to other institutional and economic outcomes among citizens in Brazil, France, and the United States.

How much do citizens value democracy? How willing are they to sacrifice their liberties and voting rights for growth, equality, or other social outcomes? We design a conjoint experiment in nationally representative surveys in Brazil, France, and the United States in which respondents choose between different societies that randomly vary in their economic outcomes (country income, income inequality, social mobility), political outcomes (democracy, public health insurance), and the level of personal income for each respondent. Our research allows us to estimate the respondents' willingness to trade off democracy for individual income (as well as other societal attributes). We find that, on average, individuals are strongly attached to democracy and a robust welfare state. They prefer to live in a country without free democratic elections only if their individual income multiplies by at least three times and in a country without public health insurance only if their individual income more than doubles. After estimating these preferences at the individual level for all respondents, we show that, although there is an authoritarian minority in all three countries, forming a nondemocratic majority (by offering more income and/or other goods to respondents) is very unlikely. Our findings imply that, contrary to a growing discussion about the crisis of democracy, liberal democratic values remain substantially robust in high and middle income democracies.

Social Decision-Making Analysis: A General Approach to Inform Decisions on Resources in the Public Sector.

OBJECTIVES: Public expenditure aims to achieve social objectives by improving a range of socially valuable attributes of benefit (arguments in a social welfare function). Public expenditure is typically allocated to public sector budgets, where budget holders are tasked with meeting a subset of social objectives. METHODS: Decision makers require an evidence-based assessment of whether a proposed investment is likely to be worthwhile given existing levels of public expenditure. However, others also require some assessment of whether the overall level and allocation of public expenditure are appropriate. This article proposes a more general theoretical framework for economic evaluation that addresses both these questions. RESULTS: Using a stylized example of the economic evaluation of a new intervention in a simplified UK context, we show that this more general framework can support decisions beyond the approval or rejection of single projects. It shows that broader considerations about the level and allocation of public expenditure are possible and necessary when evaluating specific investments, which requires evidence of the range of benefits offered by marginal changes in different types of public expenditure and normative choices of how the attributes of benefit gained and forgone are valued. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed framework shows how to assess the value of a proposed investment and whether and how the overall level of public expenditure and its allocation across public sector budgets might be changed. It highlights that cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis can be viewed as special cases of this framework, identifying the weakness with each.

Values Beyond "Health" in Budget-Constrained Healthcare Systems.

OBJECTIVES: Most current methods to value healthcare treatments only incorporate measures such as quality-adjusted life-years, combining gains in health-related quality of life and life expectancy in specific ways. Failure of these methods to recognize other dimensions of value has led to calls for methods to include additional values that are associated with the healthcare treatments but not captured directly by quality-adjusted life-years. This article seeks to provide methodologically sound ways to incorporate additional health-related outcomes, focusing on budget-constrained healthcare systems, in which using standard welfare economics methods are often eschewed. METHODS: The analysis develops standard extra-welfarist approaches to maximizing aggregate health, subject to fixed-budget constraints, using Lagrange multiplier methods. Then, additional valuable health-related outcomes, eg, reduced caregiver burden, real option value, and market- and non-market productivity are introduced. The article also introduces a social welfare function approach to illuminate how disability, disease severity and other equity-related issues can be incorporated into complete welfare measures. RESULTS: Resulting analysis, fully developed in an Appendix in Supplemental Materials found at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.02.005 and summarized in the main text, show that understanding how average and marginal healthcare costs increase with output and how health augments "additional values" provides ways to assess willingness to pay for them in these fixed-budget situations. CONCLUSIONS: In budget-constrained healthcare systems, only from actual budget allocations can values both of health itself and "additional values" be inferred. These methods, combined with methodologically sound social welfare functions, demonstrate how to move from "health" to "welfare" in measuring the value of increased healthcare use.

Three Pillars of Support for Orphan Drug Programs: Individual Valuations, Societal Valuations, and Anonymous Altruism.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe potential societal and individual sources of support for orphan drug programs. METHODS: The Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method shows that acute illness and disability severity increase individuals' willingness to pay for health gains. We develop a social welfare function (SWF) that incorporates individuals' own values, combined with politically or ethically determined weights. We introduce the concept of horizontal equity-that individuals in similar situations should be treated similarly-into the SWF. Finally, we introduce anonymous altruism into individuals' utility functions-the desire to help others, without knowing their identity. RESULTS: Combined with the empirical link between disease severity and rarity, the Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method demonstrates heightened willingness to pay for health gains for people with rare diseases, leading rational individuals to support orphan drug programs, our first pillar of support. Adding horizontal equity to the SWF further increases societal support for orphan drug programs. Anonymous altruism, focusing most strongly on those in the most-dire circumstances, leads to altruistic support for those with severe disorders. Because innovators' economic incentives lead them to focus on larger markets, anonymous altruistic individuals will increasingly prefer public investments into rare diseases over time, as private markets systematically produce gains for common diseases. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 3 supporting pillars for orphan drug programs: (1) individuals' propensity to prefer treatments for severe diseases; (2) the preference for horizontal equity in our social welfare; (3) anonymous altruism, the desire to help strangers, coupled with market incentives that underserve strangers with rare diseases.

The effect of social pension on health-related quality of life of the rural older people: a panel study from China.

BACKGROUND: Social pensions, social assistance systems for older people in rural areas, have been put into place in many nations and have positively impacted health. The long-term health consequences of social pension programs in China are uncertain. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term health consequences of the new rural social pension (NRSP) for the rural older people in China. METHODS: Based on the 2011 and 2018 China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study, we compared the scores on eight Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) subscales of the rural older people before and after participation in the NRSP. The propensity score matching and difference-in-difference methods were used in data analysis. We also conducted a heterogeneity analysis for subgroups with different characteristics and pension enrolment times. RESULTS: The NRSP significantly enhanced scores on physical functioning, role-physical, and self-rated mental health of old rural participants by 1.90 (p < 0.01), 2.05 (p < 0.01), and 2.93 (p < 0.05), respectively. After excluding newly enrolled individuals, the beneficial health effects of the NRSP remained significant. There were no significant changes due to NRSP in the other five scores on the HRQoL subscale of the rural older people. The NRSP had more health benefits for older people in underdeveloped areas without formal schooling. CONCLUSIONS: The NRSP reduced health disparities and had long-term benefits on the physical and mental health of the rural older people. We suggest continuously expanding the NRSP throughout rural China and further improving the social support system to enhance the overall quality of life of the rural older people. Comparable social pension programs aimed at underprivileged groups could also be conducted in other low- or middle-income nations.

Process Evaluation of Individual Placement and Support and Participatory Workplace Intervention to Increase the Sustainable Work Participation of People with Work Disabilities.

PURPOSE: This study is a process evaluation of the use of Individual Placement and Support (IPS) and Participatory Workplace Intervention (PWI) to increase the work participation of people with work disabilities. We ran the evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial (RCT), to investigate whether and to what extent IPS and PWI were executed according to protocol. METHODS: The study population consisted of clients with work disabilities, and their job coaches who were employed by the municipality of a large city in the Netherlands. Data were collected between September 2019 and November 2022 using registration forms, accompanied by researchers' notes and logbooks. RESULTS: For IPS the dose delivered was reasonable and the IPS fidelity measurement score was fair. The job search focused on paid work for almost all clients and was based on their wishes as indicated in the protocol, but integration of employment services with (health) care was often lacking. A minority of the clients who were assigned to PWI received the intervention, often because the client did not start work within the follow-up period and a workplace was a requirement to apply the intervention. CONCLUSION: The results of this study show that IPS was executed reasonably and with a fair fidelity, which indicated implementation was sufficient to find an effect on work participation in the RCT. PWI was barely realized in practice and no conclusions regarding the fidelity could be drawn. We therefore conclude that we cannot expect PWI to have any effect on work participation in the RCT.

Individual Placement and Support and Participatory Workplace Intervention on the Work Participation of People with Disabilities: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: This study assessed the effectiveness of Individual Placement and Support (IPS), Participatory Workplace Intervention (PWI), and IPS + PWI on work participation and health of people with work disabilities. METHODS: A randomised controlled 2 × 2 factorial trial with 120 clients and an 18-month follow-up was performed. Differences between IPS and no-IPS and between PWI and no-PWI were assessed using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In the IPS group, restricted mean survival time (RMST) for sustainable paid employment was 352 days, compared to 394 in the no-IPS group (HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.81-2.63). In the PWI group the RMST was 378 days, compared to 367 in the no-PWI group (HR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.48-1.64). For the secondary outcome 'starting any paid employment, a trial placement, or education' RMST was significantly lower for the IPS group (222 days) than for the no-IPS group (335 days; HR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.01-3.42). Mental health was significantly lower (worse) in the PWI group (difference -4.07, 95% CI = -7.93 to -0.22) than in the no-PWI group. For all other secondary outcomes, no statistically significant differences were found. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences were observed in the duration until starting sustainable employment between IPS and no-IPS, and between PWI and no-PWI. The duration until starting any paid employment, a trial placement, or education was shorter in the IPS group than in the no-IPS group, but further research should explore whether this also increases sustainable employment in the longer term.

Socioeconomic determinants of small and medium-sized dairy farms in the Ecuador-Colombia border area.

The socioeconomic factors influencing small-scale dairy producers in the border area between Ecuador and Colombia were meticulously identified. Employing a non-experimental design, the study leveraged multivariate statistical analysis to discern key determinants. Data processing was executed using the statistical software SPSS v27, facilitating comprehensive analysis. A random survey was administered to 532 small and medium-scale dairy producers in the Carchi province of Ecuador, employing a structured questionnaire supplemented with a Likert scale for nuanced insights. Based on 35 original variables, seven determining factors were identified in dairy farms: political representation, adequate housing, equipment, innovation, empathy, profitability, social welfare, which combined explain 60.95% of the system's variability. Such factors affect production, the level of household income, as well as their effect on the standard of living of households. Three groups were formed, the first with a low perception of economic development (Traditionalists 33.3%); the second with a better expectation of economic development (Modernizers 27.6%); and the third, identified with greater economic development (Innovators 10.3%). Each group presents cases with a low to high standard of living perspective. The groups have peculiarities in terms of their performance that can be applied to the entire population. A significant relation was established between socioeconomic factors and standard of living.

VA social workers identify factors predictive of enrollment and variability in Veterans' access to aid and attendance benefits.

The Aid and Attendance (A&A) benefit is a cash entitlement for Veterans who served in the U.S. military to obtain personal care services. Our objective was to identify factors contributing to variation in A&A enrollment across VA Medical Centers (VAMCs). We used VA data to calculate the enrollment rate among older Veterans receiving a VA pension or compensation in 2015, then purposefully sampled social work leaders at 15 VAMCs with the highest (n = 7) and lowest (n = 8) enrollment rates for interviews. All respondents viewed A&A as an important benefit. Participants at high-enrollment sites indicated strong working relationships with Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and Veterans Service Organizations (VSOs) with onsite presence and education about A&A facilitate access. Participants at low-enrollment sites indicated they desired education around A&A eligibility criteria and collaboration with VBA/VSOs. VA and non-VA social workers would benefit from education about VBA's benefits, and this requires collaboration with VBA representatives.

Abortion Policy in the United States: The New Legal Landscape and Its Threats to Health and Socioeconomic Well-Being.

Policy Points The historic 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision has created a new public policy landscape in the United States that will restrict access to legal and safe abortion for a significant proportion of the population. Policies restricting access to abortion bring with them significant threats and harms to health by delaying or denying essential evidence-based medical care and increasing the risks for adverse maternal and infant outcomes, including death. Restrictive abortion policies will increase the number of children born into and living in poverty, increase the number of families experiencing serious financial instability and hardship, increase racial inequities in socioeconomic security, and put significant additional pressure on under-resourced social welfare systems.