Health tourism: social welfare through international trade

2010 ◽  
Vol 48 (04) ◽  
pp. 48-2199-48-2199
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filipe Martins ◽  
◽  
Alberto A. Pinto ◽  
Jorge Passamani Zubelli ◽  

Agro Ekonomi ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Sri Widodo

The problem on food security in Indonesia began to be interested since the economic crisis as one component of the social security net. Sustainable food security covers: availability of food, accessibility, utilization, stability, self reliance (autonomy) and sustainability. . Hirarchically food security can be at global order, regional, national, local, household and individual. The higher order offbod security is a necessary condition but not sufficient condition for the lower order.Economic theory indicate that there are gains to be made from free trade. increase the efficiency ufresource allocation, and increase welfare of all countries. However, all government, without exception, intervene to varying degrees in the working of natural market prces, with the reason the need to protect infant industry, to ensure food security, to redistribute income, and to enhance income of small producers.The liberalization initiatives culminated in UR agreement and WTO, among others, dismantling of quantitative restriction and subsidies as well as other nontariff barriers, but there were several new thing of antidumping tariff, sanitary and phytosanitary, technical barrier to trade,environment, and genetically modified organism.The impact of trade liberalization on exporter countries, in general, would benefit the producers, decrease the consumer surplus, and increase social welfare except large populated as India and China. The impact of importer countries depend on the policy of each country. Malaysia and Indonesia by decreasing import tariff policy would increase consumer surplus and social welfare but sacrificing the producers/farmers.National food policies consist of international trade policy domestic price policy, and policy on production efficiency. The international trade policy means to protect producers, consumers, and social welfare from the uncertainty of international market especially in the long run. The stabilization of domestic price policy needs inter department coordination and STE to implement. Protection could result inefficiency but it is needed for commodities those are not ready to compete and to protect from unfair trade, to protect farmers and long run food security.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. 61-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
SLIM BEN YOUSSEF

We consider a non-cooperative three-stage game played by two regulator-firm hierarchies. We suppose that raising public funds is socially costly and that market sizes are large enough. Contrary to what might be expected, we show that opening markets to international trade increases the per-unit emission-tax and decreases the per-unit R&D subsidy. It also increases the R&D level, production, and pollution when the marginal damage of pollution is sufficiently high, and, consequently, decreases the emission ratio and the social welfare. However, we think that these results might change if the market sizes are not too large or if we introduce asymmetric information.


2021 ◽  
pp. 000276422110200
Author(s):  
Tom Cliff

This special issue of American Behavioral Scientist examines the irregular transactions and informal institutions that constitute the essential underside of the Chinese economy. Contributors with a range of disciplinary backgrounds explore shadow banking, social welfare and rural development by private enterprise, NGO financing, the credit/debt cycle of informal international trade, and offshore investment by Chinese state-owned enterprises. The question posed by all contributors is as follows: How, in China through the 2010s, do irregular or nonlegal financial transactions influence political authority? Institutions, the rules and norms by which we live, are found to be key. This “Introduction” sketches the conceptual links between money, rules, and ruling in the context of the heightened authoritarianism and institutional formalization of the 2010s—the Xi Jinping era.


This edition presents an up-to-date and diverse review of the best in social policy scholarship over the past 12 months, from a group of internationally renowned authors. The collection offers a comprehensive discussion of some of the most challenging issues facing social policy today, including an examination of Brexit, the Trump presidency, ‘post-truth’, the prison system, migration, the lived experiences of food bank users, health tourism as an alleged benefit fraud, and the future of welfare benefits. Published in association with the SPA, the volume will be valuable to academics and students within social policy, social welfare and related disciplines.


Author(s):  
Arye L. Hillman ◽  
Ngo Van Long

Contestable benefits or rents are of primary importance for the study of public finance and public policy. Rents are assigned through decisions about budgetary spending and taxation. Public policy creates and assigns rents through decisions about regulation of competition, international trade, the environment, foreign aid, and more. Contestable rents are also found outside of government, for example in academia, or when contests take place for mates. There is a social loss when resources and initiative used in contesting rents could have been used productively. Lack of data and denial by successful rent seekers that rent seeking took place are obstacles to direct measurement of social loss. Contest models are therefore used to infer magnitudes of social loss. The models show conditions under which the observable value of a rent can be used to approximate the generally unobservable value of resources used in contesting the rent. The generic contest model describes social losses when individuals seek a personal benefit. Social losses are diminished when, as is characteristic of democracies, groups contest collective benefits. Views on the importance of rent seeking can be influenced by ideology. Government as seeking to maximize social welfare is inconsistent with political creation of contestable rents that are assigned for privileged benefit.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document