In this paper we examine different forms of a 4th hurdle for the reimbursement of pharmaceuticals, i.e. an economic evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceuticals. This instrument is aimed to organize the decision on the reimbursement of pharmaceuticals more efficiently than it is currently the case in the German health care system where the market authorization of the product is normally sufficient for a product to be included into the benefits catalogue. Also the arrangement of the reimbursement price is economically problematic. Obviously, the way the instrument is designed is of paramount importance for the efficiency of a 4th hurdle. There are a lot of variations imaginable which yield very different results. In addition, the usefulness of the 4th hurdle must be assessed before the background of relevant politically enforceable alternatives. In this respect a properly arranged 4th hurdle is an improvement compared to the status quo. Indeed, it is for sure not the best conceivable regulation design for a liberalized pharmaceutical market in a statutory health insurance system.

No abstract

No abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractAlthough Russia's WTO-accession is foreseeable, there are still deficits in the literature on its concrete effects on the sectoral and regional levels. In this paper we analyse effects on Russia's chemical and petrochemical sectors (CPS), which are, unlike for example its oil and mineral gas industry, rarely in the focus of public attention. On the basis of an extensive examination of these sectors' current condition, we expect serious problems for them to emerge in the nearer future, the perhaps most serious and most puzzling problem being underinvestment. Our analysis is based on data provided by GOSKOM-STAT/ROSSTAT, Russia's official statistics institute.The authors like to thank Henning P. Jørgensen for valuable comments on an earlier version of the paper.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Summary: The paper gives a brief overview of probable further developments of the EU-ETS. At first, we discuss scenarios for the auspices of the Post-Kyoto-Regime providing a general framework of the EU-ETS in the period after 2012. We find that Europe is likely to still have an ambitious CO 2 -regime after 2012, provided that the global post-2012 process does not cease to exist and that there will be no "face-saving" regulation. CDM will become increasingly important. Auctioning of emission allowances is likely to be introduced after 2012. The fuel independent benchmark is likely to become subject of public discussion again. Public discussion on carbon market intervention by the government will continue, although one should be sceptical with respect to its results. In general, one must not ignore the fact that deficiencies in carbon market performance which could be observed during the first year after its installation in the beginning of 2005 were mostly due to mistakes in market design and to a lack of experience of market participants in using the instrument. JEL Classification: D44, Q58, H87, L51, Q28 Terms of use: Documents in