Suchergebnisse

Introduction -- Data for health equity analysis: requirements, sources, and sample design -- Health outcome #1: child survival -- Health outcome #2: anthropometrics -- Health outcome #3: adult health -- Measurement of living standards -- Concentration curves -- The concentration index -- Extensions to the concentration index: inequality aversion and the health achievement index -- Multivariate analysis of health survey data -- Nonlinear models for health and medical expenditure data -- Explaining differences between groups: Oaxaca decomposition -- Explaining socioeconomic-related health inequality: decomposition of the concentration index -- Who benefits from health sector subsidies? benefit incidence analysis -- Measuring and explaining inequity in health service delivery -- Who pays for health care? progressivity of health finance -- Redistributive effect of health finance -- Catastrophic payments for health care -- Health care payments and poverty

While the construction of a rational case for pension reform is often straightforward, the political implementation of such reform can be somewhat more difficult. In large part, this can be attributed to sceptical public opinion. The precise role played by public opinion in constraining the political feasibility of pension reform is, however, unclear. The purpose of this paper is to distil the ways in which public attitudes influence pension reform. This is done through examining survey data from Greece, where progress with the implementation of pension reform has been particularly modest. Political opposition to pension reform appears to be rooted in a general lack of public appreciation of the case for reform combined with the desire to protect interest group privileges. Public ignorance and insecurity breed attitudes not conducive to reform. Public attitudes do not simply act as a given constraint on reform but are a product of the structure of the pension system and the reform process itself. In this path-dependent process, implementation of a reform agenda of rationalisation is more difficult from the starting point of a severely fragmented and distorted system.

Given heterogeneity in incomes and health risks, with asymmetric information in the latter, preferences over the public-private mix in health insurance and care are derived. Results concerning crowding-out in the presence of adverse selection are established. For low-risk individuals, crowding-out depends on risk aversion. A set of such individuals prefers a mixed public-private health care system. A majority-voting equilibrium exists. Under weak assumptions about the income distribution and tax function, both public and private sectors exist in the equilibrium. Comparing information regimes, public provision is more likely to be positive, and will not be lower, under asymmetric information. In the presence of asymmetric information, the equilibrium is more complicated than the "ends-against-the-middle" variety derived elsewhere in the literature.

Economists are increasingly turning their attention to the measurement and causes of health inequality. This is in response to widespread concern that health disparities reflect social injustices but is also part of the trend away from the narrow focus on inequality in income to the more encompassing analysis of inequality in well-being. Researchers interested in the extent and causes of variation in well-being cannot but turn their analytical gaze on health inequalities. This volume contains methodological and empirical contributions from leading experts in health economics and economic inequality that add further momentum to a thriving field of research. The focus is on methods for the measurement of health inequalities (income-related, multidimensional and inequalities of opportunity) as well as the analysis of their causes. The collection is essential reading for researchers already working on health inequality and provides an immediate reconnaissance of the frontiers for those entering this exciting field.

This volume contains methodological and empirical research on the measurement and causes of health inequality from leading experts in health economics and economic inequality. It is essential reading for researchers working on health inequality and provides an immediate reconnaissance of the frontiers for those entering this exciting field