Parallel private health insurance in Australia

Hurley, Jeremiah E.; Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/17147

Full metadata record

DC Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Hurley, Jeremiah E.	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Australia	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	Canada	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2015-04-14T14:42:04Z	-
dc.date.available	2015-04-14T14:42:04Z	-
dc.date.issued	2001	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://www.chepa.org/portals/0/pdf/01-12.pdf	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/11375/17147	-
dc.description	Jeremiah Hurley ... [et al.].	en_US
dc.description	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.	en_US
dc.description	Bibliography: p. 31-36	en_US
dc.description	Also available via World Wide Web.	en_US
dc.format.extent	43 p.	en_US
dc.publisher	McMaster University	en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries	CHEPA working paper series 01-12	en_US
dc.subject	Insurance, Health	en_US
dc.subject	economics	en_US
dc.subject	Insurance, Health	en_US
dc.subject	economics	en_US
dc.subject	National Health Programs	en_US
dc.subject	National Health Programs	en_US
dc.subject	Private Sector	en_US
dc.subject	Private Sector	en_US
dc.subject	Privatization	en_US
dc.subject	economics	en_US
dc.subject	Privatization	en_US
dc.subject	economics	en_US
dc.subject	Insurance Coverage	en_US
dc.subject	trends	en_US
dc.subject	Insurance Coverage	en_US
dc.subject	trends	en_US
dc.subject	Hospitals, Private	en_US
dc.subject	Hospitals, Private	en_US
dc.subject	Hospitals, Proprietary	en_US
dc.subject	economics	en_US
dc.subject	Hospitals, Proprietary	en_US
dc.subject	economics	en_US
dc.title	Parallel private health insurance in Australia	en_US
dc.type	text	en_US
Appears in Collections:	CHEPA Working Paper Series

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

Show simple item record