Social democracy and market reform in Australia and New Zealand

Social democratic governments in Australia and New Zealand adopted policies of radical free-market reform, including financial deregulation, privatization, and public-sector reform in the 1980s. Because of the absence of institutional obstacles to government action, reform was faster and more comprehensive in New Zealand than in Australia. The New Zealand reforms were associated with increasing inequality and generally poor economic outcomes. There is nothing in the New Zealand experience to support the view that radical free-market economic policies are consistent with social democratic welfare policies or with social democratic values of concern for the disadvantaged, The Australian reforms were less radical, and were accompanied by some refurbishment of the welfare state. Economic performance did nor improve, as anticipated by advocates of reform, but was considerably better than that of New Zealand.

Tuberculosis and health sector reform: experience of integrating tuberculosis services into the district health system in rural South Africa

SETTING: Hlabisa health district, South Africa. OBJECTIVE: To describe the integration of a vertical tuberculosis control programme into an emerging 'horizontal' district health system, within the context of health sector reform. DESIGN: Descriptive account of the process of integration of the programme into the health system. RESULTS: A highly 'vertical' system of delivering tuberculosis treatment (with poor programme outcomes) was converted into a (horizontal' team, integrated within the district health system, that used available resources such as village clinics and community health workers, with improved programme outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In some settings at least, integration of tuberculosis 'programmes' into the district health system as tuberculosis 'teams' is feasible, and may produce highly cost-effective outcomes.

State sector reform and agriculture in China

China's state sector reform process is examined through the key sector of agriculture. A preview of aggregate statistics and broader reform measures indicate the declining role of the state. However, a systematic analysis of administrative, service and enterprise structures reveal the nuances of how the state has retained strong capacity to guide development of the agricultural sector. State and Party policy makers aim not only to support the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of farmers, but also to pursue agricultural modernization in the context of rapid industrialization. These goals are unlikely to be achieved through a wholesale transfer of functions to the private sector, so the state has maintained or developed new mechanisms of influence, particularly in the areas of service provision and enterprise development.