ISSUE: The methods and use of economic evaluation vary greatly across countries. Some jurisdictions use QALYs, some prefer measures of clinical benefit. Some jurisdictions employ a fixed cost-effectiveness threshold in deciding whether or not to accept new technologies, others use price negotiations or payment reform. Do these differences arise by chance, or can they be linked to the underlying culture, values and institutional context in each country? If these links could be better understood, this would assist countries determine the most appropriate way using economic evaluation in their own decision-making processes. This panel will explore these issues from the perspective of the Asia-Pacific region, informed by recent research conducted in the European Union. Michael Drummond will moderate and present an overview of the issue, reporting on research conducted in Europe, Dr Fukuda will present a perspective from Japan. Professor Scuffham will give a perspective from Australia and Dr Tarn will present a perspective from Taiwan. OVERVIEW: Several countries in the Asia-Pacific region are debating how best to introduce, or expand the use of, economic evaluation in their health care decision-making processes. However, it is clear that the methods and use of economic evaluation vary greatly across countries. Some jurisdictions use QALYs, some prefer measures of clinical benefit. Some jurisdictions employ a fixed cost-effectiveness threshold in deciding whether or not to reimburse new technologies, others use price negotiations or payment reform. If the reasons for these differences in approach could be better understood, countries considering the increased use of economic evaluation might be more able to form a view on the most appropriate way forward for their jurisdiction. The purpose of this panel is to discuss these issues from the perspective of 3 countries and to explore whether the insights gained can help other countries contemplating the greater use of economic evaluation.