While “integrated” systems regulate the quantity of health services, “Bismarckian” systems regulate their price. This paper compares the consumers’ allocations implemented within the two reimbursement systems. In the model, illness has a negative impact on labor productivity while public insurance is financed through income tax. Consumers have private information with respect to a parameter which can be interpreted as heterogeneity either in intensity of their preferences for treatment or in the type of illness. The social planner may be constrained to adopt uniform insurance plans, or may be free to choose self selecting plans. The analysis of uniform plans shows that Bismarckian systems dominate integrated systems from the social welfare point of view; whereas the opposite ranking holds with self-selecting plans. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 6 (2006) Issue (Month): 3 (September) Pages: 191-213 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Did you know? All full texts are decentralized with the publishers, none reside on this server, thus making it possible to offer this service for free to all parties.