This paper presents a set of indicators to assess health care system performance. It also presents new comparative data on health care policies and institutions for OECD countries. This set of indicators allows the empirical characterisation of health care systems and the identification of groups of countries sharing similar health institutions. It also helps to uncover strengths and weaknesses of each country's health care system and assessing the scope for improving value-for-money. The empirical analysis suggests that there is room in all countries surveyed to improve the effectiveness of health care spending; there is no health care system that performs systematically better in delivering cost-effective health carebig-bang reforms are therefore not warranted; increasing the coherence of policy settings, by adopting best policy practices within a similar system and borrowing the most appropriate elements from other systems will likely be more practical and effective to raise health care spending efficiency.

This paper aims to shed light on the contribution of health care and other determinants to the health status of the population and to provide evidence on whether or not health care resources are producing similar value for money across OECD countries. First, it discusses the pros and cons of various indicators of the health status, concluding that mortality and longevity indicators have some drawbacks but remain the best available proxies. Second, it suggests that changes in health care spending, lifestyle factors (smoking and alcohol consumption as well as diet), education, pollution and income have been important factors behind improvements in health status. Third, it derives estimates of countries' relative performance in transforming health care resources into longevity from two different methods -panel data regressions and data envelopment analysis -which give remarkably consistent results. The empirical estimates suggest that potential efficiency gains might be large enough to raise life expectancy at birth by almost three years on average for OECD countries, while a 10% increase in total health spending would increase life expectancy by three to four months.

This paper assesses the potential to raise public spending efficiency in the primary and secondary education sector. Resource availability per pupil has increased significantly over the past decade in a number of countries; often in attempting to exploit the link between educational attainment and growth. However, available evidence reveals only a weak correlation between increased resource availability and pupil performance. In order to draw cross-country comparisons of the efficiency in the provision of education, the paper develops a set of comparable indicators which reflect international differences in the levels of efficiency in the primary and secondary education sector both within and among countries. The paper identifies significant scope to improve efficiency by moving towards best practice. These results are robust to a variety of approaches and are most certain when the potential gain from eliminating inefficiency is larger.

This paper presents a set of indicators to assess health care system performance. It also presents new comparative data on health care policies and institutions for OECD countries. This set of indicators allows the empirical characterisation of health care systems and the identification of groups of countries sharing similar health institutions. It also helps to uncover strengths and weaknesses of each country's health care system and assessing the scope for improving value-for-money. The empirical analysis suggests that there is room in all countries surveyed to improve the effectiveness of health care spending; there is no health care system that performs systematically better in delivering cost-effective health carebig-bang reforms are therefore not warranted; increasing the coherence of policy settings, by adopting best policy practices within a similar system and borrowing the most appropriate elements from other systems will likely be more practical and effective to raise health care spending efficiency.

This paper aims to shed light on the contribution of health care and other determinants to the health status of the population and to provide evidence on whether or not health care resources are producing similar value for money across OECD countries. First, it discusses the pros and cons of various indicators of the health status, concluding that mortality and longevity indicators have some drawbacks but remain the best available proxies. Second, it suggests that changes in health care spending, lifestyle factors (smoking and alcohol consumption as well as diet), education, pollution and income have been important factors behind improvements in health status. Third, it derives estimates of countries' relative performance in transforming health care resources into longevity from two different methods -panel data regressions and data envelopment analysis -which give remarkably consistent results. The empirical estimates suggest that potential efficiency gains might be large enough to raise life expectancy at birth by almost three years on average for OECD countries, while a 10% increase in total health spending would increase life expectancy by three to four months.