Abstract
This Article presents a new, welfarist defense of the use of QALYs (quality adjusted life years) in policy evaluation. It challenges both the conventional wisdom among health economists that QALY-based analysis is dominated by traditional cost-benefit analysis (i.e., the sum of willingness-to-pay amounts) as well as the standard view of public health researchers that QALYs should function as the effectiveness metric in a cost-effectiveness analysis. Instead, the Article defends a nontraditional form of cost-benefit analysis, where QALYs are multipled by a conversion factor, for example $100,000 per QALY, and added to the monetized non-health effects of a policy. Part I of the Article surveys the current literature on QALYs. Part II shows that QALYs can be a more accurate measure of overall well-being than WTP amounts, under certain conditions, and argues that cognitive difficulties interfering with the measurement of WTP amounts can be circumvented by QALYs. Part III describes the limitations of QALYs. Part IV discusses the role that QALYs should play in welfarist policy analysis, given their strengths and limitations. In particular, it presents a pragmatic approach to determining the QALY-to-dollar conversion factor, and sheds new light on the controversy about pricing whole lives versus life-years.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
