IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vas/papers/78.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A General-Equilibrium Analysis of Public Policy for Pharmaceutical Prices

Author

Abstract

Retail sales of prescription drugs totaled $154.5 billion in 2001. The National Institute for Health Care Management estimates annual sales will exceed $400 billion by the year 2010. This paper analyzes the welfare and distributional effects of two policy families that could be used to cope with high and rising pharmaceutical costs. We employ a general-equilibrium approach to contrast the current patented-monopoly system with a) a price ceiling imposed on the pharmaceutical sector of the economy; and b) a universal insurance program covering pharmaceutical purchases. We use a version of the Kelton and Wallace (1995) monopoly production environment: a two-good general-equilibrium model in which a license is required to produce one of the goods. Individuals in the model are heterogeneous with respect to preferences, but have identical production technologies and labor resources. Results indicate potential welfare gains for both the price-ceiling and universal-insurance policies, with very distinct distributional effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelton, Christina M.L. & Rebelein, Robert P., 2005. "A General-Equilibrium Analysis of Public Policy for Pharmaceutical Prices," Vassar College Department of Economics Working Paper Series 78, Vassar College Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:vas:papers:78
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://irving.vassar.edu/VCEWP/VCEWP78.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiangkang Yin, 2001. "A Tractable Alternative to Cobb‐Douglas Utility for Imperfect Competition," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 14-21, March.
    2. repec:bla:jpbect:v:4:y:2002:i:2:p:243-70 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    4. Heather L. Bednarek & Rowena A. Pecchenino, 2002. "A Macroeconomic Analysis of Publicly Funded Health Care," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 4(2), pages 243-270, April.
    5. Xiangkang Yin, 2001. "A Model of Shareholder Discounts," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(236), pages 89-102, March.
    6. Amy Finkelstein, 2003. "Health Policy and Technological Change: Evidence from the Vaccine Industry," NBER Working Papers 9460, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Frank Lichtenberg, 2000. "The Benefits and Costs of Newer Drugs: Evidence from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey," CESifo Working Paper Series 404, CESifo.
    8. Cowling, Keith & Mueller, Dennis C, 1978. "The Social Costs of Monopoly Power," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 88(352), pages 727-748, December.
    9. Erik Canton & Ed Westerhout, 1999. "A model for the Dutch pharmaceutical market," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(5), pages 391-402, August.
    10. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    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. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    2. Winghan Kwong & Edward Norton, 2007. "The Effect of Advertising on Pharmaceutical Innovation," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 31(3), pages 221-236, November.
    3. Laura Magazzini & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2009. "Nuove politiche per l'innovazione nel settore delle scienze della vita," Working Papers CERM 03-2009, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    4. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    5. Patricia M. Danzon & Eric L. Keuffel, 2014. "Regulation of the Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 407-484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Pammolli, Fabio & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2004. "Market Structure and Drug Innovation," MPRA Paper 16212, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. James W. Hughes & Michael J. Moore & Edward A. Snyder, 2002. ""Napsterizing" Pharmaceuticals: Access, Innovation, and Consumer Welfare," NBER Working Papers 9229, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Danzon, Patricia M. & Nicholson, Sean & Pereira, Nuno Sousa, 2005. "Productivity in pharmaceutical-biotechnology R&D: the role of experience and alliances," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 317-339, March.
    9. Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2013. "Neglected infectious diseases: Are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting drug development research?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 185-208, April.
    10. Hermosilla, Manuel & Wu, Yufei, 2018. "Market size and innovation: The intermediary role of technology licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 980-991.
    11. Moshe Levy & Adi Rizansky, 2014. "Market failure in the pharmaceutical industry and how it can be overcome: the CureShare mechanism," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(2), pages 143-156, March.
    12. Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2011. "Neglected infectious diseases: are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting research?," MPRA Paper 40193, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Manuel Hermosilla, 2021. "Rushed Innovation: Evidence from Drug Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 257-278, January.
    14. Kristopher J. Hult, 2017. "Measuring the Potential Health Impact of Personalized Medicine: Evidence from MS Treatments," NBER Working Papers 23900, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Toole, Andrew A., 2012. "The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-12.
    16. Pedro Garcia-del-Barrio, 2017. "Pareto-improving income redistribution: expanding consumer access to the vaccines market," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 275-313, August.
    17. Dubois, Pierre & Gandhi, Ashvin & Vasserman, Shoshana, 2022. "Bargaining and International Reference Pricing in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Research Papers 3889, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    18. Pierre Dubois & Olivier de Mouzon & Fiona Scott-Morton & Paul Seabright, 2015. "Market size and pharmaceutical innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(4), pages 844-871, October.
    19. Kristopher J. Hult, 2018. "Measuring the Potential Health Impact of Personalized Medicine: Evidence from Multiple Sclerosis Treatments," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Dimensions of Personalized and Precision Medicine, pages 185-216, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:vas:papers:78. 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: Sean Flynn (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edvasus.html .

    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.