UK and Twenty Comparable Countries GDP-Expenditure-on-Health 1980-2013: The Historic and Continued Low Priority of UK Health-Related Expenditure (original) (raw)
Related papers
What Can We Afford For the National Health Service?
Social Policy & Administration, 1992
The annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is here used as a standard measure against which to compare expenditure on Health & Welfare and Defence budgets, between Conservative and Labour governments and the four largest EC countries I 973/4-1993/4. An analysis of Mrs Thatcher's governments' expenditure shows that proportionately less GDP went to General Government Expenditure (GGE) than all the other European Community countries. Mrs Thatcher's first government maintained the unprecedented level of GDP devoted to Health reached in I 978179, but successive administrations began to reduce, and, plan further reductions of GDP for the NHS. Relative decreases of GDP were also found in relation to expenditure on Social Security, Housing, and Personal Social Services and Defence. The governments of France, Germany and Italy provided more of their GDP to health than Britain, whilst at the same time we spent more on Defence and Law & Order & Public Safety. This raises the question: what can we afford for the NHS? A review of demographic changes shows that the British infant and elderly population, who are associated with demands for health, were proportionately more numerous than in France, Germany and Italy. This suggests the need for more UK health expenditure if Britain is to meet current and future needs.
Expenditure on healthcare in the UK: A review of the issues
Fiscal Studies, 2001
This review examines the performance of the UK healthcare system. After presenting data on the level and distribution of resources, three topics are examined. The first is the lessons from international comparisons of evidence on expenditure, equity and healthcare outcomes. The second is the lessons from the recent internal market reforms. The third is the lessons from an analysis of the role for private finance in UK healthcare. The review concludes that economists and policymakers need to focus more attention on the relationship between healthcare inputsexpenditure -and health outcomes, and, within this, on the incentives facing suppliers and demanders of healthcare.
What is the right level of spending needed for health and care in the UK?
The Lancet, 2021
The health and care sector plays a valuable role in improving population health and societal wellbeing, protecting people from the financial consequences of illness, reducing health and income inequalities, and supporting economic growth. However, there is much debate regarding what is the appropriate level of funding in the UK. In this paper we look at the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, historical spending in the UK and comparable countries, assess the role of private spending, and review spending projections to estimate future needs. Public spending on health has increased by 3•7% a year, on average, since the NHS was founded in 1948, and has assumed a larger share of both the economy and government expenditure. Over the last decade, except during the pandemic, the rate of growth of government spending for the health and care sector has slowed. We argue that without average growth in public spending on health of at least 4% per year, in realterms, there is a real risk of degradation of the NHS, reductions in coverage of benefits, increased inequalities and increased reliance on private financing. COVID-19 has highlighted major issues in the capacity and resilience of the health and care system. We recommend an independent review to examine what additional funds are required to better equip the UK to withstand further acute shocks and major threats to health. A similar, if not higher, level of growth in public spending on social care is needed in order to provide high standards of care and decent terms and conditions for
2017
The implementation of austerity run programs by the 2010-15 Conservative Government had a significant impact on how healthcare in the UK operated. This paper shows how the Conservatives' ideological drive to 'reduce the state' and cut state spending led to significant policy changes in regards to the NHS and healthcare benefits.
BMJ, 2019
Objective To determine how the UK National Health Service (NHS) is performing relative to health systems of other high income countries, given that it is facing sustained financial pressure, increasing levels of demand, and cuts to social care. Design Observational study using secondary data from key international organisations such as Eurostat and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Setting Healthcare systems of the UK and nine high income comparator countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and the US. Main outcome measures 79 indicators across seven domains: population and healthcare coverage, healthcare and social spending, structural capacity, utilisation, access to care, quality of care, and population health. Results The UK spent the least per capita on healthcare in 2017 compared with all other countries studied (UK 3825(£2972;€3392);mean3825 (£2972; €3392); mean 3825(£2972;€3392);mean5700), and spending was growing at slightly lower levels (...