A közérdek védelmének intézményei Public-Private Partnership esetében = Institutional approaches to protecting public interest in Public-Private Partnership projects

A tanulmány a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) egyik nagy kérdésének megközelítéseit vizsgálja: miként védhető a közérdek e projektekben. Piaci és nem piaci megoldásokat tesz az elemzés mérlegre, valamint kitér arra, hogy miért különleges a PPP projektek esetében a közérdek védelmének kérdése. A szabályozott verseny körülményeinek kialakítása több megközelítésben is perdöntő kérdés a PPP értéknövelésének előmozdításához, bár a létező megoldások nem mentesek anomáliáktól. A képviseleti demokrácia intézményi működésének támogatására pedig a társadalmi részvétel megoldásait javasolja az irodalom. E megközelítés is több formájában, többféle céllal és szintén kihívásokkal segítheti az értéknövelő PPP projekteket. A tanulmány az elvi lehetőségek értékelő elemzését követően a megvalósítás realitásait is mérlegre teszi. = This study focuses on a key issue in Public-Private Partnership (PPP) projects: how may public interest be protected. It assesses market based and non market based approaches, and also explains why PPP projects are peculiar when addressing the protection of public interest. Setting up the conditions for simulated competition is of paramount importance for different reasons in order to enable value creating PPP projects. Existing solutions however are not without anomalies. To promote the institutions of democracy, participatory solutions are recommended in the literature. That approach may help value creating PPP projects in various forms, with a range of objectives and challenges. The study concludes the analytical assessment of options by highlighting the realistic conditions of implementation.

Rules-based economic governance in the European Union: A reappraisal of national fiscal rules.

The economic and financial crisis of 2007/2009 has posed unexpected challenges on both the global and the regional level. Besides the US, the EU has been the most severely hit by the current economic crisis. The financial and banking crisis on the one hand and the sovereign debt crisis on the other hand have clearly shown that without a bold, constructive and systematic change of the economic governance structure of the Union, not just the sustainability of the monetary zone but also the viability of the whole European integration process can be seriously undermined. The current crisis is, however, only a symptom, which made all those contradictions overt that were already heavily embedded in the system. Right from the very beginning, the deficit and the debt rules of the Maastricht Treaty and the Stability and Growth Pact have proved to be controversial cornerstones in the fiscal governance framework of the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Yet, member states of the EU (both within and outside of the EMU) have shown an immense interest in adopting numerical constraints on the domestic level without hesitation. The main argument for the introduction of national fiscal rules was mostly to strengthen the accountability and credibility of national fiscal policy-making. The paper, however, claims that a relatively large portion of national rules were adopted only after the start of deceleration of the debt-to-GDP ratios. Accordingly, national rules were hardly the sole triggering factors of maintaining fiscal discipline; rather, they served as the key elements of a comprehensive reform package of public budgeting. It can be safely argued, therefore, that countries decide to adopt fiscal rules because they want to explicitly signal their strong commitment to fiscal discipline. In other words, it is not fiscal rules per se what matter in delivering fiscal stability but a strong political commitment.

A prosztatarák gazdasági terhe nagy betegregiszterek alapján (The economic burden of prostate cancer. A systematic literature overview of registry-based studies)

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer, the most frequent malignant disease in males in Europe, accounts for a great proportion of health expenditures. AIM: A systematic review of registry-based studies about the cost-of-illness and related factors of prostate cancer, published in the last 10 years. METHOD: A MEDLINE-based literature review was carried out between January 1, 2003 and October 1, 2013. RESULTS: Fifteen peer-reviewed articles met the criteria of interest. In developed countries radiotherapy, surgical treatment and hormone therapy account for the greatest per capita costs. In Europe early stage tumours (4-7000 €, 2006), while in the USA metastatic prostate cancer (19 900-25 500 $, 2004) was associated with highest per capita expenses. In Europe the greatest costs incurred within the initial treatment (6400 €/6 months, 2008), while in the USA within the end-of-life care (depending on age: 62 200-93 400 $, 2010). CONCLUSIONS: Despite public health importance of prostate cancer, the cost-of-illness literature from Europe is relatively small.