IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifosdt/v66y2013i19p03-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health Insurance System Reform: Is Single Statutory Insurance on the Cards?

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Oberender
  • Jürgen Zerth
  • Stefan Felder
  • Martin Nell
  • Bernd Raffelhüschen
  • Christian Hagist

Abstract

The German healthcare insurance system has faced criticism for years. There is a need to reform both the statutory and the private insurance system. Is a single statutory insurance market the solution? Peter Oberender and Jürgen Zerth, University of Bayreuth, do not see the introduction of citizens’ insurance as an appropriate instrument for addressing the respective weaknesses of the statutory and private health systems. In the opinion of Stefan Felder, University of Basel and CINCH Essen, the three-way split of the German health insurance system is historically obsolete, inefficient and questionable in terms of earnings policy. It is also a growing burden on the German economy. In his view, a private citizens’ insurance scheme with transferable individual pension provisions, supplemented by state transfers for low-paid workers, would be an alternative. He sees a unified system, designed along the lines of the statutory health insurance system on the basis of flat-rate health premiums specific to individual health plans that are linked to risk structure compensation and enjoy individual premium reductions, as a second reform option. Martin Nell, University of Hamburg, argues in favour of a reform of the dual system, which would create the conditions for fair competition under which both statutory and private health insurance funds must stand their own. In his opinion, the introduction of citizens’ insurance would mean the phasing-out of the dual system in favour of a state-imposed, single insurance market without any significant product diversity and at grave legal risk. Bernd Raffelhüschen and Christian Hagist, University of Freiburg, present an alternative to the single statutory insurance system: namely a “new duality” in health insurance, whereby doctors and hospitals would turn into companies that wish to, and should, earn money by providing healthcare services. Patients would be their customers and would receive a bill for their services, which they would pay and carefully check themselves, since they would only be reimbursed a certain percentage of it.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Oberender & Jürgen Zerth & Stefan Felder & Martin Nell & Bernd Raffelhüschen & Christian Hagist, 2013. "Health Insurance System Reform: Is Single Statutory Insurance on the Cards?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 66(19), pages 03-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:66:y:2013:i:19:p:03-15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/ifosd_2013_19_1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kifmann, Mathias & Nell, Martin, 2013. "Fairer Systemwettbewerb zwischen gesetzlicher und privater Krankenversicherung," hche Research Papers 06, University of Hamburg, Hamburg Center for Health Economics (hche).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Milstein, Ricarda & Schreyögg, Jonas, 2022. "Activity-based funding based on diagnosis-related groups: The end of an era? A review of payment reforms in the inpatient sector in ten high-income countries," hche Research Papers 28, University of Hamburg, Hamburg Center for Health Economics (hche).
    2. Albrecht, Martin & Möllenkamp, Meilin & Nolting, Hans-Dieter & Hildebrandt-Heene, Susanne, 2016. "Transformationsmodelle einer Bürgerversicherung: Gestaltungsoptionen aus Sicht von Versicherten und Beschäftigten der Krankenversicherungen," Study / edition der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf, volume 127, number 332.
    3. Andree Ehlert & Thomas Wein & Peter Zweifel, 2017. "Overcoming resistance against managed care – insights from a bargaining model," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Sebastian Panthöfer, 2016. "Risk Selection under Public Health Insurance with Opt‐Out," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(9), pages 1163-1181, September.
    5. Christian Bührer & Steffen Fetzer & Christian Hagist, 2017. "Das Hamburger Beihilfemodell - Ein Vergleich der internen Renditen von GKV und PKV," WHU Working Paper Series - Economics Group 17-06, WHU - Otto Beisheim School of Management.
    6. Wasem, Jürgen & Buchner, Florian & Walendzik, Anke & Schröder, Michael, 2016. "Qualitative Analysen zur harmonisierten Berechnung einer Alterungsrückstellung und der verfassungskonformen Ausgestaltung ihrer Portabilität: Endbericht - Studie im Auftrag des Verbraucherzentrale Bun," IBES Diskussionsbeiträge 218, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute of Business and Economic Studie (IBES).
    7. Hofer, Florian & Birkner, Benjamin & Spindler, Martin, 2021. "Power of machine learning algorithms for predicting dropouts from a German telemonitoring program using standardized claims data," hche Research Papers 24, University of Hamburg, Hamburg Center for Health Economics (hche).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:66:y:2013:i:19:p:03-15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.