An empirical examination of risk equalisation in a regulated community rated health insurance market

Despite universal access entitlements to the public healthcare system in Ireland, over half the population is covered by voluntary private health insurance. The market operates on the basis of community rating, open enrolment and lifetime cover. A set of minimum benefits also exists, and two risk equalisation schemes have been put in place but neither was implemented. These schemes have proved highly controversial. To date, the debate has primarily consisted of qualitative arguments. This study adds a quantitative element by analysing a number of pertinent issues. A model of a community rated insurance market is developed, which shows that community rating can only be maintained in a competitive market if all insurers in the market have the same risk profile as the market overall. This has relevance to the Irish market in the aftermath of a Supreme Court decision to set aside risk equalisation. Two reasons why insurers’ risk profiles might differ are adverse selection and risk selection. Evidence is found of the existence of both forms of selection in the Irish market. A move from single rate community rating to lifetime community rating in Australia had significant consequences for take-up rates and the age profile of the insured population. A similar move has been proposed in Ireland. It is found that, although this might improve the stability of community rating in the short term, it would not negate the need for risk equalisation. If community rating were to collapse then risk rating might result. A comparison of the Irish, Australian and UK health insurance markets suggests that community rating encourages higher take-up among older consumers than risk rating. Analysis of Irish hospital discharge figures suggests that this yields significant savings for the Irish public healthcare system. This thesis has implications for government policy towards private health insurance in Ireland.

The ways in which new public management ideas impact upon the administrative culture of 'street-level' bureaucrats and professionals working within Irish social policy

The conventional meaning of culture is ‘widely shared and strongly held values’ of a particular group or society (Bradley and Parker, 2006: 89). Culture is not a rigid concept; it can be influenced or altered by new ideas or forces. This research examines the ways in which one set of ideas in particular, that is, those associated with New Public Management, have impacted upon the administrative culture of 'street-level' bureaucrats and professionals within Irish social policy. Lipsky (1980: 3) defined 'street-level' bureaucrats as ‘public service workers who interact directly with citizens in the course of their jobs, and who have substantial discretion in the execution of their work’. Utilising the Competing Values Framework (CVF) in the analysis of eighty three semi-structured interviews with 'street-level' bureaucrats and professionals, an evaluation is made as to the impact of NPM ideas on both visible and invisible aspects of administrative culture. Overall, the influence of NPM is confined to superficial aspects of administrative culture such as; increased flexibility in working hours and to some degree job contracts; increased time commitment; and a customer service focus. However, the extent of these changes varies depending on policy sector and occupational group. Aspects of consensual and hierarchical cultures remain firmly in place. These coincide with features of developmental and market cultures. Contrary to the view that members of hierarchical and consensual culture would pose resistance to change, this research clearly illustrates that a very large appetite for change exists in the attitudes of 'street-level' bureaucrats and professionals within Irish social policy, with many of them suggesting changes that correspond to NPM ideas. This study demonstrates the relevance of employing the CVF model as it is clear that administrative culture is very much a dynamic system of competing and co-existing cultures.

Public policies and work integration social enterprises: the challenges of institutionalism in a neoliberal era.

One particular field of Social Enterprise – WISEs or Work Integration Social Enterprises – has become increasingly recognised as being emblematic of the dynamics of social enterprises and now constitutes a major sphere of their activity globally. From their early roots, focusing on providing productive activity for the blind and those with other physical and/or intellectual disabilities, WISEs are pioneers in promoting the integration of excluded persons through a productive activity. In recent decades, WISEs have incrementally evolved as a tool for implementing national and regional labour market policies. The papers in this special edition explore how populations of WISEs in different country contexts have emerged, and in some instances, shifted in their identities over time in relation to changing national or regional public policies. This special issue is part of the ICSEM project, a worldwide research project aiming to identify, analyze and compare social enterprise models across countries, regions and fields. The special issue features five country specific analyses from the first stage of the ICSEM project where researchers focusing on WISEs examined the policy environment surrounding WISEs and the heterogeneity of the organizational WISE models that have emerged in different contexts: Ireland, the United States, Japan, Austria and Switzerland.