2007
DOI: 10.2753/pet1061-1991500201
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects on Beneficiaries of the "Monetization" of Privileges in Russia: Initial Experience in Saratov Oblast

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…15 In addition to the material effects of the reforms, equally important is evidence of changing usage patterns of public services as a result of monetisation. Now that l'gotniki must pay for these services, they report that they make fewer trips on public transport, visit friends and family less frequently and travel less often to medical facilities (Struyk et al 2006). Furthermore, the number of sanatoria trips available to federal benefit recipients fell in compared with 2005(MZSRRF 2005).…”
Section: The Monetisation Of L'goty 749mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…15 In addition to the material effects of the reforms, equally important is evidence of changing usage patterns of public services as a result of monetisation. Now that l'gotniki must pay for these services, they report that they make fewer trips on public transport, visit friends and family less frequently and travel less often to medical facilities (Struyk et al 2006). Furthermore, the number of sanatoria trips available to federal benefit recipients fell in compared with 2005(MZSRRF 2005).…”
Section: The Monetisation Of L'goty 749mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…employees of civil and armed services or those moving to strategically important or remote areas), but not based on income. As such, privileges were neither designed to serve as social assistance or relieve hardships, nor were they exclusively awarded to low-income consumers (Struyk et al, 2007;Wengle & Rasell 2008;Besstremyannaya, 2009b).…”
Section: The 2005 Social Benefits Reform In the Russian Federationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scientific reports with simulations and forecasts of possible gains and losses by beneficiaries and case studies appeared also only after the 2005 social benefits reform was actually implemented (e.g. Alexandrova & Struyk, 2007;Besstremyannaya, 2009b;Hahulina, 2005;Ovcharova, 2005;Sinitsina, 2009;Struyk et al, 2007;Volchkova et al, 2006;Wengle and Rasell, 2008). The overall number of beneficiaries was not reduced significantly and most categories of beneficiaries remained unchanged (Wengle & Rasell, 2008;Sinitsina, 2009).…”
Section: The 2005 Social Benefits Reform In the Russian Federationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation