Search results

Purpose – This chapter offers an integrative review of psychological and neurobiological differences between younger and older adults that might impact economic behavior. Focusing on key health economic challenges facing the elderly, it offers perspectives on how these psychological and neurobiological factors may influence decision-making over the life course and considers future interdisciplinary research directions.

Methodology/approach – We review relevant literature from three domains that are essential for developing a comprehensive science of decision-making and economic behavior in aging (psychology, neuroscience, and economics), consider implications for prescription drug coverage and long-term care (LTC) insurance, and highlight future research directions.

Findings – Older adults face many complex economic decisions that directly affect their health and well-being, including LTC insurance, prescription drug plans, and end of life care. Economic research suggests that many older Americans are not making cost-effective and economically rational decisions. While economic models provide insight into some of the financial incentives associated with these decisions, they typically do not consider the roles of cognition and affect in decision-making. Research has established that older age is associated with predictable declines in many cognitive functions and evidence is accumulating that distinct social motives and affect-processing profiles emerge in older age. It is unknown how these age differences impact the economic behaviors of older people and implies opportunities for path-breaking interdisciplinary research.

Originality/value of the chapter – Our chapter looks to develop interdisciplinary research to better understand the causes and consequences of age-related changes in economic decision-making and guide interventions to improve public programs and overall social welfare.

Neuroeconomics is the study of how the brain makes economic decisions. By its nature neuroeconomics studies the mechanisms of decision-making, assumed to be computational, in order to better understand the strategies people use and the choices that people make. The focus of this book is how neuroeconomics connects to health economics in a way that improves our understanding of health care and treatment decisions. This is natural for several reasons. First, the brain and the body are intimately connected to each other and the health of one depends on the other. Second, the health system is inherently about decisions. Decisions to stay healthy, decisions to diagnose illness, decisions to treat, decisions to invest in new treatments, decisions to insure, and decisions to pay. Finally, these decisions can be difficult, as the media's consistent attention to this area attests. In light of this, for this volume we chose to include chapters that review basic research on emotion or social preference that have direct relevance to decisions in health economics. We have also included chapters that refer more specifically to some aspect of people's health care or treatment decisions. In the following we indicate the chapters within each topic area. Although many chapters could arguably fit in multiple categories, we have listed each chapter only once and without particular order.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate motives and barriers for eating fish among light users and heavy users, to discuss consumer evaluation of fish quality, and to explore the existence of cross‐cultural fish consumer segments.

Qualitative data were collected through six focus group discussions, three in Spain and three in Belgium. In each country, one group consisted of heavy users while two groups included light users.

The same attitudinal motives and barriers for fish consumption can be found in both countries and across user groups, even though fish consumption levels differ considerably. The main motives for eating fish are health and taste, while the main barriers are price perception, smell when cooking fish, and that fish does not deliver the same level of satiety as compared to meat. Big differences are found between countries and user groups with respect to preparation skills and the use of quality cues. Heavy users are very skilled in evaluating fish quality, especially those in Spain, while light users, especially those in Belgium, make seemingly irrational assumptions when evaluating the quality of fish.

This study is based on qualitative focus group discussions in two European countries only.

This study explores and compares motives, barriers and quality evaluation among heavy and light fish consumers in two European countries. The paper yields valuable insights for further quantitative research into explaining variations in fish consumption, as well as for fish quality evaluation and fish market segmentation studies.

This paper extends the concept of market orientation from the firm to the value chain level and seeks to develop empirically founded propositions on determinants of different levels of market orientation of value chains.

Four case studies on value chains within the areas of agribusiness and fisheries are conducted. For each value chain, desk research is combined with interviews with decision‐makers of all types of value chain members. Interview guidelines were derived from a conceptual model of potential determinants of value chain market orientation.

Degree of market orientation of value chains is found to be related to degree of heterogeneity and dynamism of end‐users served, nature of chain relationships, regulations and prevailing mental models of decision‐makers. Short and balanced chains are believed to further upstream market orientation.

The results point at two areas, where additional research on market orientation is called for: a better conceptualization of market intelligence and theorizing on most cost effective ways of being market oriented, including implications for the distribution of market oriented activities among value chain members.

The paper underlines the importance of managing channel relationships, up to and including vertical integration, when serving markets with high degrees of end‐user volatility.

This paper is the first empirical contribution to the market orientation literature employing a perspective encompassing the whole value chain.