The right to health in public health: is this a new approach?

The international human rights community has frequently reaffirmed the importance of full respect for the right to health. However, there remains a large gap between the standards set out in Art 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the situation prevailing in most countries. While there has been a substantial amount of work done to expand upon the content of the right to health, there has been little consideration of what a right to health means for public health programming generally. This article addresses this issue by considering the compatibility of the essential elements of contemporary public health programming practice with the principles contained in General Comment No 14, para 43(f) (a minimum core obligation of the right to health). The article considers that while both contemporary public health practice and para 43(f) do contain compatible elements, the right to health brings with it new elements of monitoring (through right to health indicators) and accountability, both of which will require new tools to be adopted by the public health sector.     

What is the goal of access to health care?

This article first examines the justifications for the goal of access to health care and the variations between health systems in their endorsement of individuals' rights to health care irrespective of income, ethnicity, age and other characteristics. It then examines the meanings of the goal of "access" to health care and considers four key dimensions--service availability ("having" access), service utilisation ("gaining" access), the relevance and effectiveness of services and equity of access. These dimensions provide a common framework that can be applied across countries and health systems and employed to assess the extent to which access to health care is actually achieved.     

Who shall lead: is there a future for population health?

Despite renewed interest in population health concerns, elevation of this field in policy considerations faces many challenges. At present there is much concern about disparities and meeting improved population health objectives, but interest waxes and wanes with scientific developments and especially with dominant political alignments and ideologies. If the field of population health is to have sustained policy influence, it requires a persistent constituency, a strong organizational base both within and outside of government, and academic respectability. Population health faces many issues in seeking to become legitimized as both a unique field of study and as a significant force in public policy. Among these are a clear definition of the boundaries of the field, a continuing flow of resources for development, and attractive career structures for new recruits and future leaders.     

Markets and targets in the English National Health Service: is there a role for behavioral economics?

Over the past twenty years, the emphasis of reform attempts to improve efficiency within the English National Health Service (NHS) has oscillated between markets and targets. Both strategies are informed by standard economic theory but thus far have achieved varying degrees of success. Behavioral economics is currently in vogue and offers an alternative (or, in some cases, a complement) to standard economic theory on what motivates human behavior. There are many aspects to behavioral economics, but space constraints allow just three to be considered here: identity, loss aversion, and hyperbolic discounting. An attempt is made in this article to speculate on the extent to which these three concepts can explain the success or otherwise of the NHS market and target policies of the last two decades, and some suggestions are offered as to how policies might be usefully designed in the future. Arguably the key points are that people are more likely to be motivated if they identify with the ethos of the policy; the threat of losses will often provoke more of a response than the promise of gains; and the "immediate moment" matters enormously to individuals, so policies that require human action should be designed to make that moment as enjoyable (or as pain free) as possible.     

Redressing the imbalanced political market for health policy: a role for the state attorney general?

In current discussions of "procompetitive" approaches to health policy, the enforcement of antitrust laws in health care markets is a strategy that has attracted increasing attention: the filing of consumer-oriented health suits provides a means to "redress" the typically imbalanced "political market" in health policy. This study examines an important aspect of the antitrust enforcement process, the decision by a state attorney general to undertake an aggressive antitrust enforcement program in the health area. Three variables were found to explain this decision: the political needs of a "politician-supplier," the organizational resources of a strategic institutional position, and the availability of a relatively favorable policy arena. An assessment of the future role of state attorneys general in this area suggests that their health antitrust initiatives will increase, but that various political and resource constraints are likely to inhibit their aggressiveness in pursuing these actions.