This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Measuring equity in health care financing - reflections on (and alternatives to) the World Health Organization's fairness of financing index

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Wagstaff, Adam

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In its latest World Health Report, The World Health Organization (WHO) argues that a key dimension of a health system's performance is the fairness of its financing system. The report discusses how policymakers can improve this aspect of performance, proposes an index of fairness, discusses how it should be put into operation, and presents a league table of countries, ranked by fairness with which their health services are financed. The author shows that the WHO index cannot discriminate between health financing systems that are regressive, and those that are progressive - andcannot discriminate between horizontal inequity, and progressiveness, or regressiveness. The index cannot tell policymakers whether it deviates from 1 (complete fairness) because households with similar incomes spend different amounts on health care (horizontal inequity), or because households with different incomes spend different proportions of their income on health care (vertical inequity, given the WHO's interpretation of the ability-to-pay principle) - although the two have different policy implications. With the WHO's index, progressiveness, and regressiveness are both treated as unfair. This makes no sense, because policymakers who may be strongly averse to regressive payments (which worsen income distribution) may in the name of fairness be quite receptive to progressive payments (requiring that the better-off, who may be willing to spend proportionately more on health care, are required to pay proportionately more). The author compares the WHO index with an alternative, and more illuminating approach developed in the income redistribution literature in the early 1990s, and used in the late 1990s, to study the fairness of various OECD health care financing systems. He illustrates the differences between the approaches with an empirical comparison, using data on out-of-pocket payments for health services in Vietnam for 1993 and 1998. This analysis is of some interest in its own right, given the large share of health spending from out-of-pocket payments in Vietnam, and the changes in fees, and drug prices over the 1990s.

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.

File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2001/03/20/000094946_01030305572311/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by The World Bank in its series Policy Research Working Paper Series with number 2550.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 28 Feb 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:2550

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433
Email:
Web page: http://www.worldbank.org/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Roula I. Yazigi).

Related research
Keywords:

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Kjeld Møller Pedersen, 2002. "The World Health Report 2000: dialogue of the deaf?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(2), pages 93-101. [Downloadable!]
  2. Jeff Richardson & John Wildman & Iain K. Robertson, 2003. "A critique of the World Health Organisation's evaluation of health system performance," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(5), pages 355-366. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? About 2700 working paper series are listed on RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-19.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.