The Netherlands is one of the few countries that offer generous universal public coverage of long‐term care (LTC). Does this ensure that the Dutch elderly with similar care needs receive similar LTC, irrespective of their income? In contrast with previous studies of inequity in care use that relied on a statistically derived variable of needs, our paper exploits a readily available, administrative measure of LTC needs stemming from the eligibility assessment organized by the Dutch LTC assessment agency. Using exhaustive administrative register data on 616,934 individuals aged 60 and older eligible for public LTC, we find a substantial pro‐poor concentration of LTC use that is only partially explained by poorer individuals' greater needs. Among those eligible for institutional care, higher‐income individuals are more likely to use—less costly—home care. This pattern may be explained by differences in preferences, but also by their higher copayments for nursing homes and by greater feasibility of home‐based LTC arrangements for richer elderly. At face value, our findings suggest that the Dutch LTC insurance “overshoots” its target to ensure that LTC is accessible to poorer elderly. Yet, the implications depend on the origins of the difference and one's normative stance.
Little is known about the price sensitivity of demand for home care of the disabled elderly. We partially fill this knowledge gap by using administrative data on the beneficiaries of the main French home care subsidy program in a department and exploiting interindividual variation in provider prices. We address the potential endogeneity of prices by taking advantage of the unequal spatial coverage of providers and instrumenting price by the number of municipalities served by a provider. We estimate a price elasticity of around -0.4 that is significantly different from both 0 and -1. This less than proportionate response of consumption to price has implications for the efficiency and redistributive impact of variation in the level of copayments in home care subsidy schemes.
We study horizontal inequity in home care use in the Netherlands, where a social insurance scheme aims to allocate long‐term care according to care needs. Whether the system reaches its goal depends not only on whether eligible individuals have equal access to care but also on whether entitlements for care reflect needs, irrespective of socioeconomic status and other characteristics. We assess and decompose total inequity into inequity in (i) entitlements for home care and (ii) the conversion of these entitlements into actual use. This distinction is original and important, because inequity calls for different policy responses depending on the stage at which it arises. Linking survey and administrative data on the 65 and older, we find higher income elderly to receive less home care than poorer elderly with similar needs. Although lower income elderly tend to make greater use of their entitlements, need‐standardized entitlements are similar across income, education, and wealth levels. However, both use and entitlements vary by origin and place of residence. The Dutch need assessment seems effective at restricting socioeconomic inequity in home care use but may not fully prevent inequity along other dimensions. Low financial barriers and universal eligibility rules may help achieve equity in access but are not sufficient conditions.
The Netherlands is one of the few countries that offer generous universal public coverage of long-term care (LTC). Does this ensure that the Dutch elderly with similar care needs receive similar LTC, irrespective of their income? In contrast with previous studies of inequity in care use that relied on a statistically derived variable of needs, our paper exploits a readily available, administrative measure of LTC needs stemming from the eligibility assessment organized by the Dutch LTC assessment agency. Using exhaustive administrative register data on 616,934 individuals aged 60 and older eligible for public LTC, we find a substantial pro-poor concentration of LTC use that is only partially explained by poorer individuals' greater needs. Among those eligible for institutional care, higher-income individuals are more likely to use-less costly-home care. This pattern may be explained by differences in preferences, but also by their higher copayments for nursing homes and by greater feasibility of home-based LTC arrangements for richer elderly. At face value, our findings suggest that the Dutch LTC insurance "overshoots" its target to ensure that LTC is accessible to poorer elderly. Yet, the implications depend on the origins of the difference and one's normative stance.
La hausse des dépenses de santé est souvent présentée comme la conséquence mécanique et inévitable du vieillissement de la population. Mais ce phénomène démographique est souvent mal compris car mal connu : l’augmentation de l’espérance de vie ne conduit pas nécessairement à une dégradation de l’état de santé moyen d’une population. L’analyse des déterminants des dynamiques des dépenses de santé met en lumière le rôle décisif joué par des facteurs non démographiques. En relativisant l’impact du vieillissement, elle invite à réévaluer l’importance des choix politiques et sociaux dans l’évolution de long terme des sommes allouées à la santé.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.