IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Risk equalisation and voluntary health insurance markets: The case of Australia

Listed author(s):
  • Connelly, Luke B.
  • Paolucci, Francesco
  • Butler, James R.G.
  • Collins, Paul

In April 2007, Australia introduced a risk equalisation (RE) scheme (de facto a claims equalisation scheme), which replaced an extant reinsurance scheme that had operated since 1976. This scheme is one of a number of policy measures that the Australian Government has instituted to support the voluntary private health insurance (PHI) market which is subject to mandatory community rating and the attendant problem of selection. The latter has been a persistent concern in the Australian PHI market since the introduction of Australia's universal, compulsory national health insurance scheme Medicare. This paper presents a brief overview of Australia's health care financing arrangements and, in particular, focuses on the history, structure and functioning of the RE scheme. It provides an exposition of the operation of the scheme and empirical evidence of the scheme's effects in its first full year of operation, 2007-08. The paper makes three contributions: first, it provides the only detailed overview of the functioning of the Australian RE scheme published to date; second, it presents the first empirical measures of the scheme's operation at the level of the 38 individual PHI funds; and third, it describes the systematic differences in the scheme's operation with respect to large and small funds. Thus, this paper provides a number of insights into the operation and outcomes of the Australian RE scheme following its first year of operation.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(10)00160-0
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Health Policy.

Volume (Year): 98 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (November)
Pages: 3-14

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:98:y:2010:i:1:p:3-14
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol

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.:

as
in new window


  1. Luke B Connelly & H Shelton Brown, 2006. "Lifetime Subsidies in Australian Private Health Insurance Markets with Community Rating," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 31(4), pages 705-719, October.
  2. Paolucci, Francesco & Exter, Andre Den & De Ven, Wynand Van, 2006. "Solidarity in competitive health insurance markets: analysing the relevant EC legal framework," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(02), pages 107-126, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:98:y:2010:i:1:p:3-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

or ()

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.