Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/11375/17147| Title: | Parallel private health insurance in Australia |
| Authors: | Hurley, Jeremiah E. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis |
| Keywords: | Insurance, Health;economics;Insurance, Health;economics;National Health Programs;National Health Programs;Private Sector;Private Sector;Privatization;economics;Privatization;economics;Insurance Coverage;trends;Insurance Coverage;trends;Hospitals, Private;Hospitals, Private;Hospitals, Proprietary;economics;Hospitals, Proprietary;economics |
| Publication Date: | 2001 |
| Publisher: | McMaster University |
| Series/Report no.: | CHEPA working paper series 01-12 |
| Description: | Jeremiah Hurley ... [et al.]. This paper examines Australia's experience with parallel finance for inpatient hospital services to provide insight regarding: (a) the effectiveness of a parallel system of private finance in reducing costs and wait times in the public system; (b) risk selection between the parallel public and private insurance sectors; (c) the financial redistribution associated with the introduction and maintenance of a parallel system of finance; and (d) the dynamics of the broader political economy associated with parallel systems of finance. Australia's experience provides a number of lessons for Canada, including: (1) the potential for cost savings through introduction or expansion of a parallel private sector is very limited; (2) the introduction or expansion of a parallel private finance is unlikely to reduce wait times in the publicly financed system; (3) there is no simple way to regulate private insurers to pursue public objectives; (4) it is impossible to create an independent, isolated parallel system of private finance is false -- interactions between the public and private insurance sectors are complex and unavoidable; (5) quality plays a key role in driving the dynamics between the public and privately financed sectors; and (6) it is essential to articulate clear policy objectives for health care financing and to design public and private roles consistent with these objectives. Our overall conclusion is that the Australian experience provides a cautionary tale regarding the risks, costs and benefits of a parallel private system of health care finance. Bibliography: p. 31-36 Also available via World Wide Web. |
| URI: | http://www.chepa.org/portals/0/pdf/01-12.pdf http://hdl.handle.net/11375/17147 |
| Appears in Collections: | CHEPA Working Paper Series |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
