Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Health Econ ; 18(3): 263-90, 1999 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10537896

ABSTRACT

This paper presents further international comparisons of progressivity of health care financing systems. The paper builds on the work of Wagstaff et al. [Wagstaff, A., van Doorslaer E., et al., 1992. Equity in the finance of health care: some international comparisons, Journal of Health Economics 11, pp. 361-387] but extends it in a number of directions: we modify the methodology used there and achieve a higher degree of cross-country comparability in variable definitions; we update and extend the cross-section of countries; and we present evidence on trends in financing mixes and progressivity.


Subject(s)
Health Policy/economics , National Health Programs/economics , Social Justice , Taxes/classification , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Europe , Finland , Germany , Health Services Research , Humans , Income/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/economics , Sweden , Taxes/economics , Taxes/statistics & numerical data
2.
J Health Econ ; 18(3): 291-313, 1999 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10537897

ABSTRACT

The OECD countries finance their health care through a mixture of taxes, social insurance contributions, private insurance premiums and out-of-pocket payments. The various payment sources have very different implications for both vertical and horizontal equity and on redistributive effect which is a function of both. This paper presents results on the income redistribution consequences of the health care financing mixes adopted in twelve OECD countries by decomposing the overall income redistributive effect into a progressivity, horizontal inequity and reranking component. The general finding of this study is that the vertical effect is much more important than horizontal inequity and reranking in determining the overall redistributive effect but that their relative importance varies by source of payment. Public finance sources tend to have small positive redistributive effects and less differential treatment while private financing sources generally have (larger) negative redistributive effects which are to a substantial degree caused by differential treatment.


Subject(s)
Health Policy/economics , National Health Programs/economics , Social Justice , Taxes/classification , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Europe , Financing, Personal/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Research , Humans , Insurance, Health/economics , Models, Econometric , Taxes/economics , Taxes/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...