The political economics of social health insurance: the tricky case of individuals’ preferences

Pfarr, Christian and Schmid, Andreas (2013): The political economics of social health insurance: the tricky case of individuals’ preferences.

Abstract

Social health insurance systems can be designed with different levels of state involvement and varying degrees of redistribution. In this article we focus on citizens’ preferences regarding the design of their health insurance coverage including the extent of redistribution. Using a microeconomic model we hypothesize that the individual’s preferred options are determined by the relative income position and the relative risk of falling ill. Only individuals who expect to realize a net profit through the implicit redistributive transfers will favour a public insurance coverage over a private one. We test this hypothesis empirically using three dis-tinct approaches. The first two are based on survey questions focusing on the type of coverage and the degree of redistribution respectively. The third is based on a discrete choice experiment thus accounting for trade-offs and budget constraints. The data is from a representative sample of 1.538 German individuals who were surveyed and participated in the DCE in early 2012. We find that the model has to be rejected. There is a wide consensus that redistributive elements should be an integral part of the social health insurance system and could even be extended. However, there are also preferences for health insurance coverage that can be individually optimized.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: social health insurance; preferences; discrete choice experiment
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C93 - Field Experiments; H - Public Economics > H2 - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue > H23 - Externalities ; Redistributive Effects ; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies; H - Public Economics > H5 - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies > H51 - Government Expenditures and Health; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I13 - Health Insurance, Public and Private

References

Bateman, I. J., Carson, R. T., Day, B., Hanemann, M. and Hanley, N. (2002), Economic valuation with stated preference techniques, A manual, Elgar, Cheltenham.

Bech, M., Kjær, T. and Lauridsen, J. (2011), Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment, in: Health Economics 20 [3], pp. 273–286.

Ben-Akiva, M. and Lermann, S. R. (1985), Discrete choice analysis, Theory and applications to travel demand, MIT Press, Cambridge.

Boxall, P. C. and Adamowicz, W. L. (2002), Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Mod-els: A Latent Class Approach, in: Environmental and Resource Economics 23 [4], pp. 421–446.

Breyer, F. (1995), The political economy of rationing in social health insurance, in: Journal of Population Eco-nomics 8 [2], pp. 137–148.

Breyer, F. (2001), Income redistribution and the political economy of social health insurance: comparing Ger-many and Switzerland, Discussion Paper, Nr. 253, Berlin.

Breyer, F. and Haufler, A. (2000), Health Care Reform: Seperating Insurance from Income Redistribution, in: International Tax and Public Finance 7 [4], pp. 445–461.

Buckley, N. J., Cuff, K., Hurley, J., McLeod, L., Nuscheler, R. and Cameron, D. (2012), Willingness-to-pay for parallel private health insurance: evidence from a labratory experiment, in: Canadian Journal of Economics 45 [1], pp. 137–166.

Cameron, A. C. and Trivedi, P. K. (2008), Microeconometrics, Methods and applications, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.

Carson, R. T., Louviere, J. J., Anderson, D. A., Arabie, P., Bunch, D. S., Hensher, D. A., Johnson, R. M., Kuhfeld, W. F., Steinberg, D., Swait, J., Timmermans, H. and Wiley, J. B. (1994), Experimental Analaysis of Choice, in: Marketing Letters 5 [4], pp. 351–368.

Cutler, D. M. and Zeckhauser, R. J. (2000), The Anatomy of Health Insurance, in: Culyer, A. J. und Newhouse, J. P. (Ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, Volume 1A, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 563–643.

Epple, D. and Romano, R. E. (1996), Public Provision of Private Goods, in: Journal of Political Economy 104 [1], pp. 57–84.

Essig, L. and Winter, J. K. (2009), Item Non-Response to Financial Questions in Household Surveys: An Ex-permental Study of Interviewer and Mode Effects, in: Fiscal Studies 30 [3/4], pp. 367–390.

Gegax, D. and Stanley, L. R. (1997), Validating Conjoint and Hedonic Preference Measures: Evidence from Valuing Reductions in Risk, in: Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics 36 [2], pp. 31–54.

Gouveia, M. (1997), Majority rule and the public provision of a private good, in: Public Choice 93 [3-4], pp. 221–244.

Grignon, M. (2012), A Democratic Responsiveness Approach to Real Reform: An Exploration of Health Care Systems' Resilience, in: Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 37 [4], pp. 665–676.

Hanemann, M. (1983), Marginal Welfare Measures for Discrete Choice Models, in: Economics Letters 13 [1], pp. 129–136. Johnson, R. F. and Desvousges, W. H. (1997), Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Da-ta: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy Programs, in: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34 [1], pp. 78–99.

Kanninen, B. J. (2002), Optimal Design for Multinomial Choice Experiments, in: Journal of Marketing Research 39 [2], pp. 214–227.

Kerssens, J. J. and Groenewegen, P. P. (2005), Consumer preferences in social health insurance, in: European Journal of Health Economics 6 [1], pp. 8–15.

Kifmann, M. (2005), Health insurance in a democracy: Why is it public and why are premiums income related?, in: Public Choice 124 [3/4], pp. 283–308.

Kifmann, M. and Roeder, K. (2011), Premium subsidies and social health insurance: Substitutes or comple-ments?, in: Journal of Health Economics 30 [6], pp. 1207–1218.

Kuhfeld, W. F. (2006), Construction of Efficient Designs for Discrete-Choice-Experiments, in: Grover, R. und Vriens, M. (Ed.), The handbook of marketing research, Uses, misuses, and future advances, Sage Publ., Thousand Oaks, Calif., pp. 312–363.

Kuhfeld, W. F., Tobias, R. D. and Garratt, M. (1994), Efficient Experimental Design with Marketing Research Applications, in: Journal of Marketing Research XXXI, pp. 545–557.

Lancaster, K. J. (1966), A New Approach to Consumer Theory, in: Journal of Political Economy 74 [2], pp. 132–157.

Lancsar, E., Louviere, J. J. and Flynn, T. N. (2007), Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments, in: Social Science & Medicine 64 [8], pp. 1738–1753.

Loh, C.-P. A., Nihalani, K. and Schnusenberg, O. (2012), Measuring attitude toward social health insurance, in: European Journal of Health Economics 13 [6], pp. 707–722.

Louviere, J. J. and Street, D. J. (2000), Stated-Preference Methods, in: Hensher, D. A. und Button, K. (Ed.), Handbook of transport modelling, 1. Aufl., Pergamon, New York, pp. 131–143.

Manning, W. G., Newhouse, J. P., Duan, N., Keeler, E. B. and Leibowitz, A. (1987), Health Insurance and the Demand for Medical Care: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment, in: American Economic Review 77 [3], pp. 251–277.

Manski, C. F. (1977), The Structure of Random Utility Models, in: Theory and Decision 8, pp. 229–254.

Marquis, S. M. and Holmer, M. R. (1996), Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty and Demand for Health Insurance, in: The Review of Economics and Statistics 78 [3], pp. 421–427.

Martinussen, P. E. (2008), Self-Interest of Ideology? The Attitude of Norwegian Medical Specialists towards Private Welfare Services, in: Scandinavian Political Studies 31 [2], pp. 149–172.

McFadden, D. (1974), Conditional Logit Analysis of Quantitative Choice Behavior, in: Zarembka, P. (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics, Academic Press, New York, pp. 105–142.

McFadden, D. (1981), Econometric Models of Probabilistic Choice, in: Manski, C. F. und McFadden, D. (Ed.), Structural analysis of discrete data with econometric applications, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 198–272.

Mcguire, A. (2006), Response: Is there a case for risk-based premiums in health care insurance?, in: Health Economics, Policy and Law 1 [2], pp. 189–193.

Pauly, M. V. (2002), Why the United States does Not Have Universal Health Insurance: A Public Finance and Public Choice Perspective, in: Public Finance Review 30 [5], pp. 349–365.

Pekelman, D. and Sen, S. K. (1979), Measurement and Estimation of Conjoint Utility Functions, in: The Journal of Consumer Research 5 [4], pp. 263–271.

Pfarr, C. (2013), Einkommen, Mobilität und individuelle Präferenzen für Umverteilung, Ein Discrete-Choice-Experiment, Beiträge zur Finanzwissenschaft, Bd. 30, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen.

Sudit, M. (1988), Ideology or Self-Interest? Medical Students' Attitudes toward National Health Insurance, in: Journal of Health and Social Behavior 29 [4], pp. 376–384.

Telser, H. (2002), Nutzenmessung im Gesundheitswesen, Die Methode der Discrete-Choice-Experimente, Kovac, Hamburg.

Train, K. E. (2009), Discrete choice methods with simulation, 2nd Ed., Cambridge University Press, New York.

Van de Ven, W. (2006), Response: The case for risk-based subsidies in public health insurance, in: Health Eco-nomics, Policy and Law 1 [2], pp. 195–199.

Vroomen, J. M. and Zweifel, P. (2011), Preferences for health insurance and health status: does it matter whether you are Dutch or German?, in: European Journal of Health Economics 12 [1], pp. 87–95.

Zweifel, P. and Breuer, M. (2006a), Reply to our critics, in: Health Economics, Policy and Law 1 [2], pp. 201–202.

Zweifel, P. and Breuer, M. (2006b), The case for risk-based premiums in public health insurance, in: Health Economics, Policy and Law 1 [2], pp. 171–188.

Zweifel, P., Leukert, K. and Berner, S. (2010), Preferences for Health Insurance in Germany and the Netherlands - A Tale of Two Countries, Working Paper, Universität Zürich, Zürich.