Decentralization Can Improve Equity, but Can It Be Sustained?

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
T. Bossert, Rony Lenz, Ramiro Guerrero, Rene Miranda, Victoria Eugenia Soto Rojas, Norman Danilo Maldonado Vargas
{"title":"Decentralization Can Improve Equity, but Can It Be Sustained?","authors":"T. Bossert, Rony Lenz, Ramiro Guerrero, Rene Miranda, Victoria Eugenia Soto Rojas, Norman Danilo Maldonado Vargas","doi":"10.1080/23288604.2022.2064793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A major theoretical issue about health system reform involving decentralization has been whether it promotes equity of health system funding. An article by the principal author and others in 2003 showed that, under certain conditions and policies, decentralization improved the equity of allocation of financial resources to different income levels of municipalities in Colombia and Chile. Another recurring issue has been whether reforms can be sustained over time. In a follow-up study in 2015, we found that the equity of national allocations was sustained even though the allocation rules for intergovernmental transfers and insurance funding sources had changed, as long as per capita allocation rules were retained. Nevertheless, the wealthier municipalities in Chile were able to increase their own source funding contributing to a larger gap between wealthy and poor municipalities, suggesting that in order to assure continued equity some compensation for these funds be included in intergovernmental transfer rules or that local source funding be restricted by national policy. These reforms may be more likely to be sustained if they become embedded in existing financial systems and if they receive support of status quo constituencies.","PeriodicalId":46168,"journal":{"name":"Health Systems & Reform","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Systems & Reform","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23288604.2022.2064793","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract A major theoretical issue about health system reform involving decentralization has been whether it promotes equity of health system funding. An article by the principal author and others in 2003 showed that, under certain conditions and policies, decentralization improved the equity of allocation of financial resources to different income levels of municipalities in Colombia and Chile. Another recurring issue has been whether reforms can be sustained over time. In a follow-up study in 2015, we found that the equity of national allocations was sustained even though the allocation rules for intergovernmental transfers and insurance funding sources had changed, as long as per capita allocation rules were retained. Nevertheless, the wealthier municipalities in Chile were able to increase their own source funding contributing to a larger gap between wealthy and poor municipalities, suggesting that in order to assure continued equity some compensation for these funds be included in intergovernmental transfer rules or that local source funding be restricted by national policy. These reforms may be more likely to be sustained if they become embedded in existing financial systems and if they receive support of status quo constituencies.
权力下放可以改善公平,但它能持续下去吗?
摘要卫生体制改革中涉及分权的一个重要理论问题是分权是否促进了卫生体制经费的公平性。2003年由主要作者和其他人撰写的一篇文章表明,在某些条件和政策下,权力下放改善了哥伦比亚和智利市政当局在不同收入水平上分配财政资源的公平性。另一个反复出现的问题是,改革能否长期持续下去。在2015年的后续研究中,我们发现,只要保持人均分配规则,即使政府间转移支付和保险资金来源的分配规则发生变化,国家拨款的公平性仍然保持不变。然而,智利较富裕的市政当局能够增加它们自己的来源资金,造成富裕和贫穷市政当局之间的差距更大,因此建议为了确保持续的公平,应在政府间转移规则中列入对这些资金的一些补偿,或者国家政策应限制地方来源资金。如果这些改革融入现有的金融体系,并得到维持现状的支持者的支持,它们就更有可能持续下去。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
9.80%
发文量
35
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信