Forms of Providing and Financing Long-Term Care in OECD Countries
Halásková Renáta (),
Bednář Pavel () and
Halásková Martina ()
Additional contact information
Halásková Renáta: College of Logistics in Přerov, Palackého 1381/25, 750 02 Přerov, Czech Republic
Bednář Pavel: Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Management and Economics, Department of Regional Development, Public Sector Administration and Law, Mostní 5139, Zlín, 760 01, Czech Republic
Halásková Martina: VŠB-Technical University of Ostrava, Faculty of Economics, Department of Public Economics, Sokolská třída 33, 701 21 Ostrava, Czech Republic
Review of Economic Perspectives, 2017, vol. 17, issue 2, 159-178
Long-term care is being prioritised due to population ageing, and hand in hand with the development of professional provision of long-term care, public expendi-tures will be increasing. Mainly countries with a sharp increase in the number of people aged 80+ will have to address the sustainability of long-term care systems and the pro-curement of relevant services. This paper aims to evaluate the forms of provision and financing of long-term care in selected OECD countries. Provision and funding of long-term care in terms of a formal system are assessed based on selected criteria using analytical methods (principal component analysis and TwoStep cluster analysis). Results of the evaluation carried out in 2008 and 2013 by means of the selected indicators of long-term care, using TwoStep cluster analysis, confirmed both similar as well as different approaches to the provision and financing of long-term care in the analysed countries. The most marked differences in the provision of care based on indicators LTC recipients aged 65+ and LTC recipients in institutions as a percentage of total LTC recipients were found between the first cluster (Australia and Korea with the highest share of LTC recipients) and the second cluster (Czech Republic, Estonia, with the lowest share of LTC recipients). In financing of long-term care (LTC expenditures on institutions as a percentage of total LTC expenditures), the most significant differences were observed between the first (Australia, Korea, with the largest share of LTC expenditures on institutions) and third cluster (mainly Nordic countries, with the lowest share of LTC expenditures on institutions of total LTC expenditures).
Keywords: Long-term care; long-term care expenditure; OECD countries; provision of care; recipients of care (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: H41 H51 H75 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/revecp.2017.17.is ... -0008.xml?format=INT (text/html)
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:vrs:reoecp:v:17:y:2017:i:2:p:159-178:n:4
Access Statistics for this article
Review of Economic Perspectives is currently edited by Antonín Slaný
More articles in Review of Economic Perspectives from De Gruyter Open
Series data maintained by Peter Golla ().