IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v11y1997i3p409-32.html

Prices and Protocols in Public Health Care

Author

Listed:
  • Hammer, Jeffrey S

Abstract

The author tries to derive price and rationing rules for public health facilities. He highlights the effect on these rules of different assumptions about the objectives of government (health versus welfare), the limits of available policy instruments, and the market environment in which the public system operates. One recurrent finding: policy reform must be assessed in relation to the changes it induces relative to the status quo before reform. This point may seem obvious, but it represents a distinct gap in the literature on resource allocation in health. To assess changes, the behavior of the private sector must be known in the type of care given in a system and on how this care will change in response to the policy. Substituting for a reasonably well-functioning private sector is not as valuable as providing services that the private sector cannot be expected to sustain. Research is needed to characterize market equilibrium for medical care and its response to policy measures. The author could not examine many issues - most important, those related to uncertainty and insurance. But if the research he calls for in this paper is pursued, those issues must figure prominently as major determinants in the demand for care. This need was originally identified by Arrow, and there is still a long way to go. The author's analysis is not done in terms of preventive or curative care, and he argues for assessing interventions on the basis of changes in the stated objectives of a public system. But there could well be a connection with the preventive-curative dichotomy if there were reason to believe that preventive care will systematically lose out to curative care in a market setting. Onthe basis of people's generally acknowledged undervaluation of preventive services, this may well be the case. Other prevention activities also have many public good features, with few private alternatives, and will look good when improvements over stauts quo are examined for all interventio
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Hammer, Jeffrey S, 1997. "Prices and Protocols in Public Health Care," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 11(3), pages 409-432, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:11:y:1997:i:3:p:409-32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hammer, Jeffrey S, 1997. "Economic Analysis for Health Projects," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 12(1), pages 47-71, February.
    2. Hammer, Jeffrey S. & Berman, Peter, 1995. "Ends and means in public health policy in developing countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 29-45.
    3. Gertler, Paul J. & Hammer, Jeffrey S., 1997. "Strategies for pricing publicly provided health services," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1762, The World Bank.
    4. Jimenez, Emmanuel & DEC, 1994. "Human and physical infrastructure : public investment and pricing policies in developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1281, The World Bank.
    5. Berman, Peter A., 1998. "Rethinking health care systems: Private health care provision in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(8), pages 1463-1479, August.
    6. Musgrove, Philip, 1999. "Public spending on health care: how are different criteria related?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 207-223, May.
    7. Musgrove, Philip, 2000. "Cost-effectiveness as a criterion for public spending on health: a reply to William Jack's `second opinion'," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 229-233, December.

    More about this item

    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:oup:wbecrv:v:11:y:1997:i:3:p:409-32. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.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.