Measuring the social costs of suboptimal combinations of policy instruments: A general framework and an example

Since most agricultural programs employ two or more policy instruments simultaneously, it is notable thai little research has attempted to find optimal instrument combinations and no research exists which evaluates the social costs (unrealized benefits) of combining instruments suboptimally. In our paper we report a simple and feasible method to find optimal policy instrument combinations, and we provide the first general, formal approach to measuring the social costs of suboptimal policy instrument combinations. Our approach is illustrated in an analysis for live major U.S. crops (corn, feed grains, wheat, rice, cotton). The simple model we employ for the illustration suggests that except lor the feed grains program, the observed programs combined policy instruments quite suboptimally. We conclude that agricultural economics research now can and should begin placing increased emphasis on studying optimal policy instrument combinations.     

Materialism and Consumer Ethics: An Exploratory Study

As the issue of marketing's social responsibility grows in significance, the topic of materialism surfaces. While many marketing efforts encourage materialism, the materialism that is encouraged may have negative societal effects. An understanding of the effects of materialism on individuals, families, society, etc., is important in evaluating whether or not it is socially irresponsible for marketers to encourage materialism. However, the adequate empirical work has not yet been done on the overall effects of materialism. The current paper asks and addresses one important empirical question in this area. Do consumers who are more materialistic have different ethical standards than those who are not? Empirical evidence is presented which would indicate that materialism is negatively correlated with people's higher ethical standards as consumers. The implications for this in understanding social responsibility are discussed.     

Cost-utility analysis of the rehabilitation of patients with musculoskeletal problems

The objective of this study is to discuss the rehabilitation of patients in primary health care with problems in the musculoskeletal system from a socioeconomic perspective. A trial with coordinated rehabilitation in primary health care is compared with traditional rehabilitation. This trial, performed in Sweden in 1994, was a two-year prospective and comparative study of consecutively included patients with long-term illnesses due musculoskeletal problems (810 observations). A cost-utility analysis shows that the new rehabilitation program in primary health care is a cost-minimization program for society. There is no significant difference in the quality of life between the trial and control groups. The total cost is lower for rehabilitation in primary health care than for traditional rehabilitation (6 percent). The indirect costs are higher than the direct health care costs (60 percent), and payments from social insurance increased by 8 percent. The health economic results support rehabilitation in primary health care but also points out that this type of rehabilitation can be further improved.     

Tax Reform,Sector‐specific Labor Supply and Welfare Effects*

This paper focuses in particular on the 1992 tax reform in Norway. In this reform the top marginal tax rates were cut considerably. We find that the impact on overall labor supply is rather modest, but these modest changes shadow for stronger sectoral changes. The tax reform stimulated the women to shift their labor from the public to the private sector and to work longer hours. A calculation of mean compensated variation, calculated within the framework of a random utility model, shows that the richest households benefited far more from the 1992 tax reform than did the poorest households.