Desigualdad Social y Equidad en Salud: Perspectivas Internacionales

Desigualdad Social y Equidad en Salud: Perspectivas Internacionales Desigualdad Social y Equidad en Salud: Perspectivas Internacionales

11.07.2015 Views

functions that may include autonomy of decisions and planning, autonomy of designor execution of resources or possibility of financial fundraising at the local level. Furthermore,the term decentralization can be used to describe autonomy provided to aservice provision unity (Homedes and Ugalde 2002). Generally, the decentralizationprocess can be characterized by grouping countries into several categories accordingto the grade of transference of power to the local level.Initially, some countries completed a process of devolution, which can was definedas the complete transference of responsibilities to peripheral administrative units includingtransfer of financial resources (Kalk and Fleischer 2004). For example, thishas occurred in Chile and Colombia, which were the countries that followed moreclosely the guidelines provided by the World Bank and other international institutions.In both countries, decentralization has been accompanied by a great transformationof the health sector with increased participation of the private sector and aregulatory role by the state. The functions transferred to the municipal level, whichhave more decision-making autonomy and resource allocation, are primary healthcare services (Guimarâes 2001). Additionally, other specific functions were transferred.For instance, administration of primary level hospital care was transferred tohealth areas that cover several municipalities in Chile. In Colombia, the administrationof the subsidized sector was also transferred to the municipal level. These transferredfunctions can be contracted by the municipalities with other public or privateentities within the country. Furthermore, the allocation of resources is decided bythe central level in both countries although, in Colombia the municipalities have thepossibility of raising financial resources from fees for services. In this latter country,when the municipalities can not provide, enough administrative capacity, the functionsare assumed by the departmental level. (Bossert, Larranaga et al. 2003).In contrast to Colombia and Chile, other countries have achieved a process thatcan be more clearly defined as de-concentration, which is the transference of the executionof actions from one level of the government to another, without transferenceof autonomy of decisions. This category includes countries like Costa Rica, whichmade only few modifications to the previous system. Here, the main form of decentralizationwas the transference of functions to autonomous entities with decentralizedlevels. The reform put all provision of health care in the hands of the CostaRican Social Security Fund (CCSS), leaving the Ministry of Health with supervisingand stewardship functions. Health care provided by the CCSS is essentially free ofcharge for the great majority of the population (Rosero-Bixby 2004). The CCSSwas put in charge of financing and providing services to the population (BertodanoId 2003). In this country, there has been transference of responsibilities in hospitalcare and primary health care from the Ministry of Health to the CCSS, but withoutautonomy of decisions (Guimarâes 2001). The privatization has a limited role althoughsome changes in the essence of the reform have been proposed.Riutort, Cabarcas13

Decentralization in Mexico can also be described as de-concentration, but witha different system from that of Costa Rica. Mexico’s system is composed of threeprincipal subsystems: (1) a number of Bismark-type social security institutes thatprovide health insurance for the formally employed and their families; (2) Ministryof Health’s services and limited services from nongovernmental organizations forthe uninsured population; and (3) a large private sector that is almost entirely financedout of pocket (Barraza-Llorens, Bertozzi et al. 2002). In Mexico, the publicsector and social security (including the military services) are responsible for morethan 85% of the hospital beds. (FLEURY 2000). There is a mixed autonomy of resourcesin decentralized institutions with some central resources and some local ones(Arredondo and Parada 2000). There, the dominant element of the reform was thecreation of a single state system of health for the uninsured, which entailed transferof responsibility for uninsured populations from the Mexican institute for social security(IMSS) and the State Coordinated Health Services of the Ministry to new entitiesunder state authority. The case of Mexico has been qualified as an incompleteor non-existing decentralization in which the states did not gain a significant levelof control over even a single aspect of the system, and most of the few new powersthey gained have slowly been taken away from them (Gershberg and Jacobs 1998).Privatization has also been limited. In 1996, Mexico implemented a package of reformsthat encouraged decentralization, increasing competency of private institutionto the IMSS by establishing a market-driven system for those who are covered byhealth insurance through mandatory social security or payment and a decentralizedsystem of public minimum services for the poor (Laurell 2001). These changes pointare similar to the type of reform done by Chile and Colombia.The differences between Mexico and Costa Rica reflect just part of the varietycategorized as de-concentration, which adopts other forms in other countries. Brazil,for example, is a special case of the decentralization process in the region. There, theformulation of the reform process was tied to the democratic transition and is an attemptto consolidate a unique, public, universal and decentralized system of health,based on the idea of health as a citizen’s right guaranteed by the state, apparently inan opposite route to world-wide dynamics (Almeida 2002). The system is organizedat the federal, state/provincial/regional, and municipal levels. The federal level is legallyresponsible for formulating and implementing national health policy. It is alsoin charge of system planning, assessment, and control, as well as resource allocation.Functions at the state level involve service coordination, distribution of financialresources, and decisions related to complex specialized technological interventions.The municipalities are responsible for handling the delivery of goods and services involvedin health promotion, preventative care, health care, and rehabilitation. Fundsare allocated to each state according to AIH (authorization for hospital admission)billing, always respecting the corresponding quantitative and financial ceilings. (Almeida,Travassos et al. 2000). The system is composed of three main sub-sectors:14 Decentralization And Equity

functions that may include autonomy of decisions and planning, autonomy of designor execution of resources or possibility of financial fundraising at the local level. Furthermore,the term dec<strong>en</strong>tralization can be used to describe autonomy provided to aservice provision unity (Homedes and Ugalde 2002). G<strong>en</strong>erally, the dec<strong>en</strong>tralizationprocess can be characterized by grouping countries into several categories accordingto the grade of transfer<strong>en</strong>ce of power to the local level.Initially, some countries completed a process of devolution, which can was definedas the complete transfer<strong>en</strong>ce of responsibilities to peripheral administrative units includingtransfer of financial resources (Kalk and Fleischer 2004). For example, thishas occurred in Chile and Colombia, which were the countries that followed moreclosely the guidelines provided by the World Bank and other international institutions.In both countries, dec<strong>en</strong>tralization has be<strong>en</strong> accompanied by a great transformationof the health sector with increased participation of the private sector and aregulatory role by the state. The functions transferred to the municipal level, whichhave more decision-making autonomy and resource allocation, are primary healthcare services (Guimarâes 2001). Additionally, other specific functions were transferred.For instance, administration of primary level hospital care was transferred tohealth areas that cover several municipalities in Chile. In Colombia, the administrationof the subsidized sector was also transferred to the municipal level. These transferredfunctions can be contracted by the municipalities with other public or private<strong>en</strong>tities within the country. Furthermore, the allocation of resources is decided bythe c<strong>en</strong>tral level in both countries although, in Colombia the municipalities have thepossibility of raising financial resources from fees for services. In this latter country,wh<strong>en</strong> the municipalities can not provide, <strong>en</strong>ough administrative capacity, the functionsare assumed by the departm<strong>en</strong>tal level. (Bossert, Larranaga et al. 2003).In contrast to Colombia and Chile, other countries have achieved a process thatcan be more clearly defined as de-conc<strong>en</strong>tration, which is the transfer<strong>en</strong>ce of the executionof actions from one level of the governm<strong>en</strong>t to another, without transfer<strong>en</strong>ceof autonomy of decisions. This category includes countries like Costa Rica, whichmade only few modifications to the previous system. Here, the main form of dec<strong>en</strong>tralizationwas the transfer<strong>en</strong>ce of functions to autonomous <strong>en</strong>tities with dec<strong>en</strong>tralizedlevels. The reform put all provision of health care in the hands of the CostaRican <strong>Social</strong> Security Fund (CCSS), leaving the Ministry of Health with supervisingand stewardship functions. Health care provided by the CCSS is ess<strong>en</strong>tially free ofcharge for the great majority of the population (Rosero-Bixby 2004). The CCSSwas put in charge of financing and providing services to the population (BertodanoId 2003). In this country, there has be<strong>en</strong> transfer<strong>en</strong>ce of responsibilities in hospitalcare and primary health care from the Ministry of Health to the CCSS, but withoutautonomy of decisions (Guimarâes 2001). The privatization has a limited role althoughsome changes in the ess<strong>en</strong>ce of the reform have be<strong>en</strong> proposed.Riutort, Cabarcas13

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!