IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxivy2021i3p20-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Correlation of Effective Organ Procurement Rates and the Role of Legislation in Individual European Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Ilona Kiel-Puslecka
  • Mateusz Puslecki
  • Marek Dabrowski
  • Bartłomiej Janyga
  • Bartłomiej Perek
  • Agnieszka Zawiejska

Abstract

Purpose: Clinical transplantation has proven to be a lifesaving method since the last century. The shortage of donors and organs pool for transplantation is a worldwide subject of discussion and legislation. Design/Methodology/Approach: Authors did a critical review and identified actual donation models in individual European countries. Findings: Critical revision of the distribution of donation models in individual European countries were presented: no country has chosen the model of strict consent, 18 countries adopted a model of opt-out, of which 13 were based on a strict model of opposition, and five decided to use an extended opposition system. The extended consent model was adopted in 1/3 of European countries (14 countries), three European countries adopted the information solution, Bulgaria is the only country adopting a higher necessity model. Authors identified in European countries opt-in to opt-out movement trend and “hard” presumed consent paradox. Practical implications: Different models adopted in European countries and the shortage of organs for transplantation implicate some countries' transfer from opt-in to an opt-out model. It can benefit in increasing organ pool. Originality/value: The article includes the first complex and critical analysis of effective organ procurement and legislation models in European countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilona Kiel-Puslecka & Mateusz Puslecki & Marek Dabrowski & Bartłomiej Janyga & Bartłomiej Perek & Agnieszka Zawiejska, 2021. "Correlation of Effective Organ Procurement Rates and the Role of Legislation in Individual European Countries," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 20-31.
  • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:3:p:20-31
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ersj.eu/journal/2338/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abadie, Alberto & Gay, Sebastien, 2006. "The impact of presumed consent legislation on cadaveric organ donation: A cross-country study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 599-620, July.
    2. Parsons, Jordan Alexander, 2018. "Welsh 2013 deemed consent legislation falls short of expectations," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(9), pages 941-944.
    3. Michael P. Murray, 2006. "Avoiding Invalid Instruments and Coping with Weak Instruments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 111-132, Fall.
    4. Fırat Bilgel, 2012. "The impact of presumed consent laws and institutions on deceased organ donation," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(1), pages 29-38, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Joan Costa-Font & Caroline Rudisill & Maximilian Salcher-Konrad, 2021. "‘Relative Consent’ or ‘Presumed Consent’? Organ donation attitudes and behaviour," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(1), pages 5-16, February.
    2. Eva Thomann, 2018. "“Donate your organs, donate life!” Explicitness in policy instruments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 433-456, December.
    3. Selina Schulze Spüntrup, 2023. "Does Implementing Opt-Out Solve The Organ Shortage Problem? Evidence from a Synthetic Control Approach," ifo Working Paper Series 403, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    4. Jessica Li & Till Nikolka, 2016. "The Effect of Presumed Consent Defaults on Organ Donation," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 14(4), pages 90-94, December.
    5. repec:ces:ifodic:v:14:y:2016:i:4:p:19267800 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Bilgel, Fırat, 2013. "The effectiveness of transplant legislation, procedures and management: Cross-country evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 229-242.
    7. Jessica Li & Till Nikolka, 2016. "The Effect of Presumed Consent Defaults on Organ Donation," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 14(04), pages 90-94, December.
    8. Selina Schulze Spüntrup, 2020. "Widerspruch oder Zustimmung? Wodurch mehr Menschen zu Organspendern werden," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 27(04), pages 11-14, August.
    9. Hartwell, Christopher A., 2014. "The impact of institutional volatility on financial volatility in transition economies : a GARCH family approach," BOFIT Discussion Papers 6/2014, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    10. Pulapre Balakrishnan & M Parameswaran, 2019. "Modeling the Dynamics of Inflation in India," Working Papers 16, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    11. Miquel-Àngel Garcia-López & Ilias Pasidis & Elisabet Viladecans-Marsal, 2022. "Congestion in highways when tolls and railroads matter: evidence from European cities [The congestion relief benefit of public transit: evidence from Rome]," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(5), pages 931-960.
    12. Doko Tchatoka, Firmin Sabro, 2012. "Specification Tests with Weak and Invalid Instruments," MPRA Paper 40185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Asadullah, M. Niaz & Xiao, Saizi, 2020. "The changing pattern of wage returns to education in post-reform China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 137-148.
    14. Richard Volpe & Edward C Jaenicke & Lauren Chenarides, 2018. "Store Formats, Market Structure, and Consumers’ Food Shopping Decisions," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 672-694, December.
    15. Martin Nordin & Sören Höjgård, 2017. "An evaluation of extension services in Sweden," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 51-60, January.
    16. Dutta, Nabamita & Kar, Saibal, 2018. "Relating rule of law and budgetary allocation for tourism: Does per capita income growth make a difference for Indian states?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 263-271.
    17. Subramanian Rangan & Metin Sengul, 2009. "Information technology and transnational integration: Theory and evidence on the evolution of the modern multinational enterprise," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 40(9), pages 1496-1514, December.
    18. Vance, Colin & Frondel, Manuel, 2015. "From fuel taxation to efficiency standards: A wrong turn in European climate protection?," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113171, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    20. Andreas P. Kyriacou & Leonel Muinelo-Gallo & Oriol Roca-Sagalés, 2015. "Fiscal decentralization and regional disparities: The importance of good governance," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(1), pages 89-107, March.
    21. Tammy L. Madsen & Michael J. Leiblein, 2015. "What Factors Affect the Persistence of an Innovation Advantage?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(8), pages 1097-1127, December.

    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:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:3:p:20-31. 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: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    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.