揭开全民公共长期护理体系中隐藏的不公平现象

IF 1.9 3区 经济学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY Journal of the Economics of Ageing Pub Date : 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1016/j.jeoa.2024.100527
Joaquim Vidiella-Martin , Helena M. Hernández-Pizarro , Pilar García-Gómez , Guillem López-Casasnovas
{"title":"揭开全民公共长期护理体系中隐藏的不公平现象","authors":"Joaquim Vidiella-Martin ,&nbsp;Helena M. Hernández-Pizarro ,&nbsp;Pilar García-Gómez ,&nbsp;Guillem López-Casasnovas","doi":"10.1016/j.jeoa.2024.100527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We study the socioeconomic horizontal inequity in the allocation of publicly subsidised long-term care (LTC) in Spain, using administrative data from the universe of applicants in Catalonia. We find that, after controlling for needs, cash subsidies for informal care are disproportionately concentrated among wealthier individuals, while the use of formal care services (home care and nursing homes) is concentrated among the less well-off. This suggests that cash benefits may inadvertently facilitate access to wealthier individuals’ private care. We also find inequity in the form of provision, with in-kind services being more prevalent among the worse-off while wealthier beneficiaries are more likely to receive vouchers. While this duality in provision does not lead to significant differences in overall time to access LTC, we find that lower-income individuals wait longer for telecare, and wealthier individuals opting for in-kind nursing home care wait longer, suggesting potential differences in preferences or constraints. We find no evidence of socioeconomic inequity in the time spent navigating the administrative application process. Our findings highlight the need for policymakers to consider the potential unintended consequences of cash benefits and different forms of provision to ensure equitable access to LTC services.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45848,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Economics of Ageing","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 100527"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212828X24000276/pdfft?md5=e8c9eaac0a15c7105cb788948076a28f&pid=1-s2.0-S2212828X24000276-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unravelling hidden inequities in a universal public long-term care system\",\"authors\":\"Joaquim Vidiella-Martin ,&nbsp;Helena M. Hernández-Pizarro ,&nbsp;Pilar García-Gómez ,&nbsp;Guillem López-Casasnovas\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeoa.2024.100527\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We study the socioeconomic horizontal inequity in the allocation of publicly subsidised long-term care (LTC) in Spain, using administrative data from the universe of applicants in Catalonia. We find that, after controlling for needs, cash subsidies for informal care are disproportionately concentrated among wealthier individuals, while the use of formal care services (home care and nursing homes) is concentrated among the less well-off. This suggests that cash benefits may inadvertently facilitate access to wealthier individuals’ private care. We also find inequity in the form of provision, with in-kind services being more prevalent among the worse-off while wealthier beneficiaries are more likely to receive vouchers. While this duality in provision does not lead to significant differences in overall time to access LTC, we find that lower-income individuals wait longer for telecare, and wealthier individuals opting for in-kind nursing home care wait longer, suggesting potential differences in preferences or constraints. We find no evidence of socioeconomic inequity in the time spent navigating the administrative application process. Our findings highlight the need for policymakers to consider the potential unintended consequences of cash benefits and different forms of provision to ensure equitable access to LTC services.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45848,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Economics of Ageing\",\"volume\":\"29 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100527\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212828X24000276/pdfft?md5=e8c9eaac0a15c7105cb788948076a28f&pid=1-s2.0-S2212828X24000276-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Economics of Ageing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212828X24000276\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Economics of Ageing","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212828X24000276","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们利用加泰罗尼亚申请者的行政数据,研究了西班牙公共补贴长期护理(LTC)分配中的社会经济横向不平等现象。我们发现,在对需求进行控制后,非正规护理的现金补贴不成比例地集中在较富裕的人群中,而正规护理服务(家庭护理和养老院)的使用则集中在较不富裕的人群中。这表明,现金补贴可能会无意中为较富裕的个人提供私人护理服务。我们还发现了提供形式上的不公平,即实物服务在经济条件较差的人群中更为普遍,而较富裕的受益人则更有可能获得代金券。虽然这种提供方式上的双重性并没有导致获得长期护理的总体时间上的显著差异,但我们发现,低收入者等待远程护理的时间更长,而选择实物养老院护理的富裕者等待的时间更长,这表明在偏好或限制因素方面可能存在差异。我们没有发现任何证据表明在行政申请过程中所花费的时间存在社会经济不平等。我们的研究结果突出表明,政策制定者需要考虑现金福利和不同提供形式可能带来的意外后果,以确保公平地获得长期护理服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Unravelling hidden inequities in a universal public long-term care system

We study the socioeconomic horizontal inequity in the allocation of publicly subsidised long-term care (LTC) in Spain, using administrative data from the universe of applicants in Catalonia. We find that, after controlling for needs, cash subsidies for informal care are disproportionately concentrated among wealthier individuals, while the use of formal care services (home care and nursing homes) is concentrated among the less well-off. This suggests that cash benefits may inadvertently facilitate access to wealthier individuals’ private care. We also find inequity in the form of provision, with in-kind services being more prevalent among the worse-off while wealthier beneficiaries are more likely to receive vouchers. While this duality in provision does not lead to significant differences in overall time to access LTC, we find that lower-income individuals wait longer for telecare, and wealthier individuals opting for in-kind nursing home care wait longer, suggesting potential differences in preferences or constraints. We find no evidence of socioeconomic inequity in the time spent navigating the administrative application process. Our findings highlight the need for policymakers to consider the potential unintended consequences of cash benefits and different forms of provision to ensure equitable access to LTC services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.50%
发文量
46
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Economics of Ageing (JEoA) is an international academic journal that publishes original theoretical and empirical research dealing with the interaction between demographic change and the economy. JEoA encompasses both microeconomic and macroeconomic perspectives and offers a platform for the discussion of topics including labour, health, and family economics, social security, income distribution, social mobility, immigration, productivity, structural change, economic growth and development. JEoA also solicits papers that have a policy focus.
期刊最新文献
Intergenerational redistribution in a pay-as-you-go pension system Understanding the heterogeneous health effect of retirement by tracking daily activities Retirement consumption puzzle in Japan: Insights from pension and senior worker employment policy changes An empirical investigation of health dynamics of elders in China Regressivity in public pension systems: The case of Peru
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1