Basic versus supplementary health insurance: Access to care and the role of cost effectiveness
Journal of Health Economics, 2018, vol. 60, issue C, 53-74
In a model where patients face budget constraints that make some treatments unaffordable without health insurance, we ask which treatments should be covered by universal basic insurance and which by private voluntary insurance. We argue that next to cost effectiveness, prevalence is important if the government wants to maximize the welfare gain that it gets from its health budget. Conditions are derived under which basic insurance should cover treatments that are mainly used by high risk agents with low income.
Keywords: Universal basic health insurance; Voluntary supplementary insurance; Public vs. private insurance; Access to care; Cost effectiveness; Moral hazard; Adverse selection (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I13 I14 D82 H51 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:60:y:2018:i:c:p:53-74
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J. P. Newhouse, A. J. Culyer, R. Frank, K. Claxton and T. McGuire
More articles in Journal of Health Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().