IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v70y2022ics0160791x22001543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How are high-tech assistive devices valued in an aging society? Exploring the use and non-use values of equipment that aid limb disability

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Justine Jihyun
  • Lee, Jongsu
  • Shin, Jungwoo
  • He, Meihan

Abstract

The aging of the population structure and the increase in acquired disabilities lead to a greater need for assistive devices that promote social inclusion, which undeniably requires investment in high-tech assistive devices to promote social welfare. However, consistent efforts to develop methodologies for economic valuation of assistive technologies have been crippled by the lack of concepts associated with cost analysis, which is an essential aspect of economic valuation. This study examines the economic value of high-tech assistive devices that aid limb disability by proposing a new valuation framework that incorporates both the use and the non-use values and explores how the values vary with age. The use and the non-use value of high-tech assistive devices were estimated based on the theory of Maslow's hierarchy of human needs and the contingent valuation method. The average use value of high-tech assistive devices was approximately KRW 126,265.7 (USD 110.5) per month, which is 5.22% of the average income in South Korea, and the non-use value was approximately KRW 3055.8 (USD 2.7) per month. Whereas the use values decreased with age, the non-use value remained constant. In addition, while the average use value was higher than the non-use value, the percentage of non-use value in the total value of assistive devices increased with age, reflecting the higher possibility of using the device by oneself due to acquired disability.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Justine Jihyun & Lee, Jongsu & Shin, Jungwoo & He, Meihan, 2022. "How are high-tech assistive devices valued in an aging society? Exploring the use and non-use values of equipment that aid limb disability," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:70:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x22001543
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X22001543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huang, Chun-Yao & Wu, Chang-Kang & Liu, Ping-Yu, 2022. "Assistive technology in smart cities: A case of street crossing for the visually-impaired," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    2. Sukkird, Vatcharapong & Shirahada, Kunio, 2015. "Technology challenges to healthcare service innovation in aging Asia: Case of value co-creation in emergency medical support system," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 122-128.
    3. Justin Grider & Bruce Wydick, 2016. "Wheels of fortune: the economic impacts of wheelchair provision in Ethiopia," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 44-66, March.
    4. Howard R. Bowen, 1943. "The Interpretation of Voting in the Allocation of Economic Resources," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 58(1), pages 27-48.
    5. Toms, G. & Verity, F. & Orrell, A., 2019. "Social care technologies for older people: Evidence for instigating a broader and more inclusive dialogue," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    6. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    7. Brown, Suzana & Vairis, Achilles & Masoumifar, Ali M. & Petousis, Markos, 2020. "Common problems with the conventional design of crutches: Proposing a safer design and discussing the potential impact," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    8. JongRoul Woo & Sesil Lim & Yong-Gil Lee & Sung-Yoon Huh, 2018. "Financial Feasibility and Social Acceptance for Reducing Nuclear Power Plants: A Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, October.
    9. Temple Jones, Chelsea & Rice, Carla & Lam, Margaret & Chandler, Eliza & Jiwon Lee, Karen, 2021. "Toward TechnoAccess: A narrative review of disabled and aging experiences of using technology to access the arts," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. S. V. Ciriacy-Wantrup, 1947. "Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4_Part_II), pages 1181-1196.
    11. Jungwoo Shin & Yeunjoong Kim & Heekoo Nam & Youngsang Cho, 2016. "Economic evaluation of healthcare technology improving the quality of social life: the case of assistive technology for the disabled and elderly," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(15), pages 1361-1371, March.
    12. Helen Larkin & Danielle Hitch & Valerie Watchorn & Susan Ang, 2015. "Working with Policy and Regulatory Factors to Implement Universal Design in the Built Environment: The Australian Experience," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Klose, Thomas, 1999. "The contingent valuation method in health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 97-123, May.
    14. Natter, Martin & Kaufmann, Katharina, 2015. "Voluntary market payments: Underlying motives, success drivers and success potentials," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 149-157.
    15. (Boni) Li, Yushi & Perkins, Amanda, 2007. "The impact of technological developments on the daily life of the elderly," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 361-368.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marek Zabłocki & Bogdan Branowski & Przemysław Kurczewski & Jarosław Gabryelski & Maciej Sydor, 2022. "Designing Innovative Assistive Technology Devices for Tourism," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-20, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Changsok Yoo & Yelim Kim & Jee Hoon Sohn, 2021. "Evaluating the Social Cost of Conflict between New Media and Society: The Case of Gaming Disorder in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-13, July.
    2. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    3. Taale, Francis & Kyeremeh, Christian, 2016. "Households׳ willingness to pay for reliable electricity services in Ghana," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 280-288.
    4. Greenberg, Dan & Bakhai, Ameet & Neumann, Peter J. & Cohen, David J., 2004. "Willingness to pay for avoiding coronary restenosis and repeat revascularization: results from a contingent valuation study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 207-216, November.
    5. Khalil, Fares Georges, 2024. "Socio-technical platforms for care transformation: An integrative synthesis and conceptualization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Smith, V. Kerry, 2000. "JEEM and Non-market Valuation: 1974-1998," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 351-374, May.
    7. Clive L Spash, 2008. "The Contingent Valuation Method: Retrospect and Prospect," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-04, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    8. Jakub Głowacki, 2018. "Monetization of social effects," Ekonomia Społeczna/Social Economy, Collegium of Economy and Public Administration, vol. 2, pages 33-40.
    9. Richard D. Smith, 2000. "The Discrete-choice Willingness-to-pay Question Format in Health Economics:," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 20(2), pages 194-204, April.
    10. Isabel Mendes, 2013. "Mining Rehabilitation Planning, Mining Heritage Tourism, Benefits and Contingent Valuation," Working Papers wp032013, SOCIUS, Research Centre in Economic and Organisational Sociology at the School of Economics and Management (ISEG) of the University of Lisbon.
    11. Edwin Muchapondwa & Fredrik Carlsson & Gunmar Köhlin, 2006. "Can local communities in Zimbabwe be trusted with wildlife management?: Evidence from contingent valuation of elephants," Working Papers 052, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    12. Diego De Maria André & José Raimundo De Araújo Carvalho Júnior, 2016. "Spatial Willingness To Pay For A First Order Stochastic Reduction On The Risk Of Robbery," Anais do XLII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 42nd Brazilian Economics Meeting] 166, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    13. Kim, Ju-Yeon & Mjelde, James W. & Kim, Tae-Kyun & Lee, Choong-Ki & Ahn, Kyung-Mo, 2012. "Comparing willingness-to-pay between residents and non-residents when correcting hypothetical bias: Case of endangered spotted seal in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 123-131.
    14. Isabel Mendes, 2015. "Tackling the Multidimensional Characteristics of Archaeological Heritage with Preference Based Approaches," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 5(4), pages 995-995.
    15. Massimo Florio & Francesco Giffoni, 2020. "A contingent valuation experiment about future particle accelerators at CERN," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, March.
    16. Isabel Mendes, 2016. "Assessing the Values of Archaeological Heritage," Working Papers Department of Economics 2016/02, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    17. Jaimie Kim Bayani Arias & Vicente G. Ballaran, Jr. & Maria Emilinda T. Mendoza & Rowena A. Dorado & Bessie M. Burgos, 2016. "Economic Analysis of Flood Adaptation Options in the Sta. Cruz River Watershed, Laguna, Philippines," EEPSEA Research Report rr20160336, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Mar 2016.
    18. Jin, Taeyoung & Lee, Tae Eui & Kim, Dowon, 2024. "Valuing flexible resources in the Korean electricity market based on stated preference methods," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    19. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    20. Abay Asfaw & Joachim Braun, 2005. "Innovations in Health Care Financing: New Evidence on the Prospect of Community Health Insurance Schemes in the Rural Areas of Ethiopia," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 241-253, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:70:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x22001543. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.