scholarly journals State budget transfers to Health Insurance Funds for universal health coverage: institutional design patterns and challenges of covering those outside the formal sector in Eastern European high-income countries

Author(s):  
Ileana Vilcu ◽  
Inke Mathauer
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Bazyar ◽  
Arash Rashidian ◽  
Vahid Yazdi-Feyzabadi ◽  
Anahita Behzadi

Abstract Background : Fragmentation in health insurance system can obstruct reaching universal health coverage’ objectives and may lead to inequity in financial and organizational access to health care services. One possible option to overcome this challenge is merging the existing insurance funds together. This article aims to review the experience of Turkey, Thailand, South Korea and Indonesia regarding merging which can be very useful for other countries which are looking for ways of enhancing their health systems. Methods: The present study is a cross-country comparative analysis. The first criterion to choose these countries was with experience of the policy of merging. The second criterion was diversity in health insurance systems. To find the most relevant documents about the subject, different sources of information were searched including books, scientific papers, reports, policy documents and documents published by international organizations such as WHO and World Bank. We followed snowball sampling method to reach out for further documents by checking the reference list of the most relevant documents. We also contacted the authors with the most relevant articles in the selected countries to introduce and provide us with more articles or publications about the subject. Results: The experience of Turkey, Thailand, South Korea and Indonesia show that different reasons may force policy makers to move towards merging and reducing the number of health insurance funds; different stakeholders may support or oppose merging based on the interests they may have in the current fragmented health insurance system; various positive and negative consequences may occur in the health system as the result of merging. The experience of these countries also emphasize that in order to accelerate and facilitate implementation process of merger and face less operational challenges, there should be some prerequisites such as experiencing reliable economic growth to enhance benefit package and support the single national insurance scheme financially after merging. Conclusions: Merging is not the panacea to all problems of health system and other contributing health reforms should be implemented simultaneously or sequentially in other aspects of health system if merging is going to pave the way reaching universal health coverage.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Bazyar ◽  
Vahid Yazdi-Feyzabadi ◽  
Arash Rashidian ◽  
Anahita Behzadi

Abstract Background: Fragmentation in health insurance system can obstruct reaching universal health coverage’ objectives and may lead to inequity in financial and organizational access to health care services. One possible option to overcome this challenge is merging the existing insurance funds together. This article aims to review the experience of Turkey, Thailand, South Korea and Indonesia regarding merging which can be very useful for other countries which are looking for ways of enhancing their health systems. Methods: The present study is a cross-country comparative analysis. The first criterion to choose these countries was with experience of the policy of merging. The second criterion was diversity in health insurance systems. To find the most relevant documents about the subject, different sources of information were searched including books, scientific papers, reports, policy documents and documents published by international organizations such as WHO and World Bank. We followed snowball sampling method to reach out for further documents by checking the reference list of the most relevant documents. We also contacted the authors with the most relevant articles in the selected countries to introduce and provide us with more articles or publications about the subject. Results: The experience of Turkey, Thailand, South Korea and Indonesia show that different reasons may force policy makers to move towards merging and reducing the number of health insurance funds; different stakeholders may support or oppose merging based on the interests they may have in the current fragmented health insurance system; various positive and negative consequences may occur in the health system as the result of merging. The experience of these countries also emphasize that in order to accelerate and facilitate implementation process of merger and face less operational challenges, there should be some prerequisites such as experiencing reliable economic growth to enhance benefit package and support the single national insurance scheme financially after merging. Conclusions: Merging is not the panacea to all problems of health system and other contributing health reforms should be implemented simultaneously or sequentially in other aspects of health system if merging is going to pave the way reaching universal health coverage.


2003 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Filinson ◽  
Piotr Chmielewski ◽  
Darek Niklas

In January 1999, the Polish government implemented a new law reorganizing the health care in the country. This paper includes an outline of the changes, the main impact of which consisted of introduction of universal health insurance administered by Health Insurance Funds (‘‘Kasy Chorych’’). In June 2001 and 2002, a survey of insurance administrators and health care workers provided data concerning the reception of the new system, the perceived inadequacies, and the postulated changes. The intended objective of privatization of health provisions appears as remote as it was before the changes. The major obstacles are identified as political hurdles, physician resistance, and continued dependence on state allocations.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyriakos Souliotis Souliotis ◽  
Petros Tsantilas ◽  
Xenophon Contiades

Τhe funding impasse and the operational malfunction of the new organization (EOPOYY) in 2011 necessitated the provision for an exemption from this rule, applicable to health insurance funds which could prove their sustainability outside EOPYY. The objective of this paper is to assess the feasibility and viability of the creation of an independent health insurance fund for<br />employees of the banking sector, which would operate as a private entity and would not burden the state budget with its deficits. The paper aims to develop a paradigm for further analyses as we move towards the establishment of a new, national, health insurance structure.


Author(s):  
Jan Abel Olsen

This chapter considers two different ways of organizing revenue collection in statutory healthcare schemes: social health insurance and taxation. The two models are commonly referred to as ‘Bismarck vs Beveridge’ after the men associated with the origin of these systems: the first German chancellor Otto von Bismarck (1815–1898), and the British economist Lord William Beveridge (1879–1963). The differences between these two compulsory prepayment schemes are discussed and compared with private health insurance. Based on a simple diagram introduced by the World Health Organization, three dimensions of coverage are illustrated. Some policy dilemmas are highlighted when attempting to achieve universal health coverage. Finally, various combinations of public and private prepayment schemes are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document