Home Duke University Press
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents


Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 1998 23(1):1-33; DOI:10.1215/03616878-23-1-1
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jacobs, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Duke University Press

Seeing Difference: Market Health Reform in Europe

Alan Jacobs
University of Bath

The comparative literature on health care reform has identified a convergence upon market models as nations respond to similar economic, technological, social, and demographic pressures. In this article I first challenge the conventional view by comparing "market" reforms of the late 1980s and early 1990s in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Though these nations did indeed converge upon the instrument of the market incentive, there was considerable divergence in the content and aims of their reform strategies. These nations designed their respective markets to make different tradeoffs among competing values. While all three exploited the principle of provider competition, they appointed different actors to judge the contest: the cost-conscious public authority in the United Kingdom, the quality-conscious patient in Sweden, and the optimizing consumer in the Netherlands. I argue that these countries were thus using common market tools to promote different health policy goals. Distinguishing these reforms further is the fact that—particularly in the Netherlands—there was a gap between market plans and the reality of implemented change. I then ask why nations responded so differently to such similar objective pressures. My contention is that this divergence reflects, in part, the different ideological orientations of the ruling party or coalition in each nation. Yet divergence is also the result of differences in both the design of political institutions and the structure of the pre-reform health system in each country.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PubliusHome page
J. Jordan
Federalism and Health Care Cost Containment in Comparative Perspective
Publius, July 30, 2008; (2008) pjn022v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Med PhilosHome page
A. Bergmark
Market Reforms in Swedish Health Care: Normative Reorientation and Welfare State Sustainability
J Med Philos, June 1, 2008; 33(3): 241 - 261.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and LawHome page
M. A. Peterson
Managed Care: Ethics, Trust, and Accountability
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, January 1, 1998; 23(4): 611 - 615.
[PDF]




  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents


Copyright 1998 by Duke University Press