IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jgu/wpaper/1708.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Explains Generosity in the Public Financing of High-Tech Drugs? An Empirical Investigation for 25 OECD Countries and 11 Controversial Drugs

Author

Listed:
  • Katharina Böhm

    (Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz)

  • Claudia Landwehr

    (Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz)

  • Nils Steiner

    (Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz)

Abstract

In times of increasing cost pressures public health care systems in the OECD countries face the question whether and to which extent new high-tech drugs are to be financed within their public health care systems. Systematic empirical research that tries to explain across-country variation in these coverage decisions is, however, almost non-existent. We analyze an original dataset that contains coverage decisions for 11 controversial drugs in 25 OECD countries via multilevel modeling. Our results indicate that regulations to what extent a pharmaceutical is publicly financed are unrelated to wealth and general expenditure levels for health care, while societal health care systems tend to be more generous. By taking into account that rationing decisions have been (at least partially) delegated to specialized agencies in all of the countries under investigation, we also uncover suggestive evidence that institutional characteristics of the underlying decision processes matter systematically for coverage decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Katharina Böhm & Claudia Landwehr & Nils Steiner, 2017. "What Explains Generosity in the Public Financing of High-Tech Drugs? An Empirical Investigation for 25 OECD Countries and 11 Controversial Drugs," Working Papers 1708, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    • Handle: RePEc:jgu:wpaper:1708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://download.uni-mainz.de/RePEc/pdf/Discussion_Paper_1708.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ostrom, Elinor, 2009. "An Agenda for the Study of Institutions," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 89-110, December.
    2. Weaver, R. Kent, 1986. "The Politics of Blame Avoidance," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 371-398, October.
    3. Daniels, Norman & Sabin, James E., 2002. "Setting Limits Fairly: Can we learn to share medical resources?," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195149364.
    4. -, 1986. "Agenda = Agenda," Series Históricas 8749, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    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. Ayranci, Evren, 2010. "Family involvement in and institutionalization of family businesses: A research," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center (PRADEC), vol. 3(3), pages 1-22, October.
    2. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    3. Raitio, Kaisa, 2013. "Discursive institutionalist approach to conflict management analysis — The case of old-growth forest conflicts on state-owned land in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 97-103.
    4. Schmidt, Susanne K., 2002. "Die Folgen der europäischen Integration für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Wandel durch Verflechtung," MPIfG Discussion Paper 02/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    5. David P Carter & Christopher M Weible & Saba N Siddiki & Xavier Basurto, 2016. "Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 159-185, January.
    6. Gillespie, Stuart & van den Bold, Mara, 2015. "Stories of change in nutrition: A tool pool:," IFPRI discussion papers 1494, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Buitrago R., Ricardo E. & Barbosa Camargo, María Inés, 2021. "Institutions, institutional quality, and international competitiveness: Review and examination of future research directions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 423-435.
    8. Blind, Georg, 2015. "Behavioural rules: Veblen, Nelson-Winter, Oström and beyond," MPRA Paper 66866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. White, Thomas A., 1992. "Landholder Cooperation For Sustainable Upland Watershed Management: A Theoretical Review Of The Problems And Prospects," Working Papers 11887, Environmental and Natural Resources Policy Training Project.
    10. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1991. "Games Real Actors Could Play: The Challenge of Complexity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 277-304, July.
    11. Monique Borges & Eduardo Castro & João Marques, 2014. "Decision support methodologies in public policy formulation," ERSA conference papers ersa14p899, European Regional Science Association.
    12. Paul, Bénédique & Garrabé, Michel, 2011. "Le capital institutionnel dans l'analyse du développement : Prolongement théorique et premier test empirique [Institutional Capital in Economic Development Analysis: Theoretical Continuation and Fi," MPRA Paper 39016, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Christopher Weible & David Carter, 2015. "The composition of policy change: comparing Colorado’s 1977 and 2006 smoking bans," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(2), pages 207-231, June.
    14. Hotte, Ngaio & Kozak, Robert & Wyatt, Stephen, 2019. "How institutions shape trust during collective action: A case study of forest governance on Haida Gwaii," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Thompson, John, 1995. "Participatory approaches in government bureaucracies: Facilitating the process of institutional change," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(9), pages 1521-1554, September.
    16. Hugo Marcelo Zunino, 2006. "Power Relations in Urban Decision-making: Neo-liberalism, 'Techno-politicians' and Authoritarian Redevelopment in Santiago, Chile," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(10), pages 1825-1846, September.
    17. Beata Stepien & Monika Sulimowska-Formowicz, 2016. "Economic Vs. Organisational Perspective On Inter-Organisational Relations’ Analysis – Are Economists On The Dead-End Track?," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(1), pages 159-177, March.
    18. Lee-Peuker, Mi-Yong & Klauer, Bernd, 2010. "Bringing about institutional change in public brownfield management: The case of Saxony-Anhalt (Germany)," UFZ Discussion Papers 5/2010, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    19. Alexis Tsoukiàs & Gilberto Montibeller & Giulia Lucertini & Valérie Belton, 2013. "Policy Analytics: An Agenda for Research and Practice," Working Papers hal-00874307, HAL.
    20. Benedict S. Jimenez, 2017. "Institutional Constraints, Rule-Following, and Circumvention: Tax and Expenditure Limits and the Choice of Fiscal Tools During a Budget Crisis," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 5-34, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Delegation; independent regulatory agencies; health care; priority setting; multilevel analysis;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:jgu:wpaper:1708. 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: Research Unit IPP (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vlmaide.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.