Working Paper: NBER ID: w22632
Authors: Julio J. Elias; Nicola Lacetera; Mario Macis
Abstract: Societies prohibit many transactions considered morally repugnant, although potentially efficiency-enhancing. We conducted an online choice experiment to characterize preferences for the morality and efficiency of payments to kidney donors. Preferences were heterogeneous, ranging from deontological to strongly consequentialist; the median respondent would support payments by a public agency if they increased the annual kidney supply by six percentage points, and private transactions for a thirty percentage-point increase. Fairness concerns drive this difference. Our findings suggest that cost-benefit considerations affect the acceptance of morally controversial transactions, and imply that trial studies of the effects of payments would inform the public debate.
Keywords: efficiency; morality; kidney donation; repugnant transactions
JEL Codes: C91; D01; D47; D63; I11; K32; Z13
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| efficiency of kidney procurement systems (D61) | individuals' preferences for these systems (P00) |
| moral considerations (A13) | individuals' preferences for these systems (P00) |
| type of payment system (E42) | perceived fairness (D63) |
| perceived fairness (D63) | willingness to accept such systems (P40) |
| type of payment system (E42) | willingness to accept such systems (P40) |
| efficiency of kidney procurement systems (D61) | fairness concerns (D63) |
| median respondent's acceptance threshold for private transactions (E42) | efficiency of kidney procurement systems (D61) |