Crowding out in blood donation:: Was titmuss right?
Crowding out in blood donation:: Was titmuss right?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1162/jeea.2008.6.4.845
复制
发表时间：
2008-06-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Johannesson, Magnus
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mellstrom, Carl;Johannesson, Magnus
Richard Titmuss在他1970年的开创性著作《礼物关系》（The Gift Relationship）中指出，献血的金钱补偿可能会挤占献血者的供应。为了验证这一说法，我们用三种不同的处理方法进行了实地试验。在第一次治疗中，受试者有机会成为献血者而不需要我的补偿。在第二种治疗中，受试者可以获得50瑞典克朗（约7美元）作为献血者的报酬，在第三种治疗中，受试者可以在50瑞典克朗的报酬和向慈善机构捐赠50瑞典克朗之间做出选择。结果在男性和女性之间差别很大。对于男性来说，献血者的供应在三个实验组之间没有显著差异。对女性来说，这是一种明显的挤出效应。当引入货币支付时，献血者的供应量几乎减少了一半。允许个人将奖金捐赠给慈善机构也会产生显著的效应，这种效应完全抵消了挤出效应。
In his seminal 1970 book, The Gift Relationship, Richard Titmuss argued that monetary compensation for donating blood might crowd out the supply of blood donors. To test this claim we carried out a field experiment with three different treatments. In the first treatment subjects were given the opportunity to become blood donors without,my compensation. In the second treatment subjects received a payment of SEK 50 (about $7) for becoming blood donors, and in the third treatment subjects could choose between a SEK 50 payment and donating SEK 50 to charity. The results differ markedly between men and women. For men the supply of blood donors is not significantly different among the three experimental groups. For women there is a significant crowding-out effect. The supply of blood donors decreases by almost half when a monetary payment is introduced. There is also a significant effect of allowing individuals to donate the payment to charity, and this effect fully counteracts the crowding-out effect.