T<scp>HE</scp>P<scp>OLITICAL</scp>E<scp>CONOMY OF</scp>H<scp>EALTH IN</scp><scp>THE</scp>U<scp>NITED</scp>S<scp>TATES</scp>

Wilkerson, John

doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.6.121901.085546

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, in the case of healthcare, expenditure is a particularly bad indicator of government effort (see e.g. Wilkerson, 2003).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, in the case of healthcare, expenditure is a particularly bad indicator of government effort (see e.g. Wilkerson, 2003). (2) Following Streeck and Mertens (2011) and Beramendi and his colleagues (2015), I expand the SI dimension by including public spending for R&D. Investing in R&D is in fact part and parcel of a SI strategy centred on human capital in a knowledge-based economy, and was among the targets of the Lisbon Strategy.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Which Roads (if any) to Social Investment? The Recalibration of EU Welfare States at the Crisis Crossroads (2000–2014)

Ronchi

2018

J. Soc. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social investment approach has been advocated as a blueprint for recasting European welfare states since the years of the Lisbon Strategy. After the Euro crisis squeezed the fiscal space available for welfare recalibration, the question has been raised as to whether social investment could withstand the economic turmoil. Relying on a new welfare expenditure dataset constructed from various Eurostat sources, this article looks at the budgetary recalibration of 27 EU welfare states from the launch of the Lisbon Strategy to the aftermath of the Euro crisis (2000 to 2014). It compares the financial efforts that governments have put into social investment- and social protection-oriented policies, highlighting the different trajectories taken by EU welfare states at the crisis crossroads. Four scenarios for welfare recalibration are put forward, based on the social investment perspective and its critiques. The results show that the overall progress made by social investment in welfare budgets since 2000 came to a halt with the outbreak of the crisis. Bleaker scenarios materialised, whereas EU welfare states pursued retrenchment rather than investment, or had to face harsher budgetary trade-offs, expanding social investment to the detriment of social protection.

show abstract

“…Moreover, in the case of healthcare, expenditure is a particularly bad indicator of government effort (see e.g. Wilkerson, 2003).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Roads (if any) to Social Investment? The Recalibration of EU Welfare States at the Crisis Crossroads (2000–2014)

Ronchi

2018

J. Soc. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Health care is a critical factor in the quality of life of people of all nations and presents major problems for their governments. The spending worldwide of "health caredollars" continues to grow and serious questions are being asked concerning the effectiveness of the expenditure (Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care 1999; Lee 2004;Mehrotra et al 2003;Wagner and McCarthy 2004;Wilkerson 2003;World Health Organization 2004). The problems are multi-faceted and have many social, technological and economic dimensions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This influence concerns many stakeholders of the medical care system and the regulatory bodies that govern that system; it also has sparked substantial international debate and has raised a number of important questions in countries around the globe. Wilkerson (2003), for example, posed the question, "Is the U.S. health care system in crisis?" (p. 328).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Rose by Any Other Name? The Influence of Brand Name versus Chemical Differences in the Prescription of Antidepressants

Ward

Pecotich

O’Cass³

et al. 2008

Journal of Macromarketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The public share reflects policy differences in the organization of health care (Maarse 2006), and is one, while certainly not the only, key manifestation of the underlying differences in institutional regimes (e.g., national health services vs. national insurance systems) (Beckfield, Olafsdottir, and Sosnaud 2013;Wendt 2009). The size of the public share influences health care costs, shapes the organization of insurance, and affects how costs and risks are distributed across the population (Anderson et al 2003;Jordan 2011;Laugesen and Glied 2011;Morgan and Campbell 2011;Reinhardt, Hussey, and Anderson 2004;Tuohy, Flood, and Stabile 2004;Wilkerson 2003;Wilsford 1995). Public health care is the first or second most expensive social policy in all rich democracies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Path Dependency and the Politics of Socialized Health Care

Brady¹,

Marquardt²,

Gauchat³

et al. 2016

Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rich democracies exhibit vast cross-national and historical variation in the socialization of health care. Yet, cross-national analyses remain relatively rare in the health policy literature and health care remains relatively neglected in the welfare state literature. We analyze pooled time series models of the public share of total health spending for eighteen rich democracies from 1960 to 2010. Building on path dependency theory, we present a strategy for modeling the relationship between the initial 1960 public share and the current public share. We also examine two contrasting accounts for how the 1960 public share interacts with conventional welfare state predictors: the self-reinforcing hypothesis expecting positive feedbacks and the counteracting hypothesis expecting negative feedbacks. We demonstrate that most of the variation from 1960 to 2010 in the public share can be explained by a country's initial value in 1960. This 1960 value has a large significant effect in models of 1961-2010, and including the 1960 value alters the coefficients of conventional welfare state predictors. To investigate the mechanism whereby prior social policy influences public opinion about current social policy, we use the 2006 International Social Survey Programme (ISSP). This analysis confirms that the 1960 values predict individual preferences for government spending on health. Returning to the pooled time series, we demonstrate that the 1960 values interact significantly with several conventional welfare state predictors. Some interactions support the self-reinforcing hypothesis, while others support the counteracting hypothesis. Ultimately, this study illustrates how historical legacies of social policy exert substantial influence on the subsequent politics of social policy.

show abstract

THEPOLITICALECONOMY OFHEALTH INTHEUNITEDSTATES

Cited by 10 publications

References 42 publications

Which Roads (if any) to Social Investment? The Recalibration of EU Welfare States at the Crisis Crossroads (2000–2014)

Which Roads (if any) to Social Investment? The Recalibration of EU Welfare States at the Crisis Crossroads (2000–2014)

A Rose by Any Other Name? The Influence of Brand Name versus Chemical Differences in the Prescription of Antidepressants

Path Dependency and the Politics of Socialized Health Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About