Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McIntyre, D.
Right arrow Articles by Gilson, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McIntyre, D.
Right arrow Articles by Gilson, L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Policy and Planning; 18(1): 47-58
© Oxford University Press 2003

A tale of two visions: the changing fortunes of Social Health Insurance in South Africa

Di McIntyre1, Jane Doherty2 and Lucy Gilson2,3

1 Health Economics Unit, University of Cape Town, South Africa,
2 Centre for Health Policy, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa and
3 Health Economics and Financing Programme, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

Over the last two decades there has been growing interest in the potential of Social Health Insurance (SHI) as a health care financing mechanism in low- and middle-income countries. SHI schemes exist in many countries of Latin America and have also been introduced across Asia in recent years. However, few countries in Africa have implemented SHI. Despite the sustained interest in SHI, there are growing concerns about whether it will achieve equity and financial sustainability objectives. It is clear that the design of SHI is of critical importance in this regard. South Africa has debated whether or not to implement SHI for nearly a decade and a half, and the design of SHI proposals has changed dramatically over that period. This paper considers lessons that can be drawn from the South African experience of developing and adapting SHI design, in conjunction with recent evidence from other low- and middle-income countries. The paper illustrates how SHI design may be affected by the trade-offs that are made to accommodate key actors’ views, an accommodation that may even undermine the achievement of key objectives. A critical design requirement to promote equity and sustainability is a common contribution and risk pool across the SHI and any existing private insurers. In addition, given the complexity of SHI reforms, and the fact that SHI is usually only one component of a broader package of health sector reforms, the appropriate sequencing of implementation of the SHI and associated, supporting organizational and financing reforms is essential. As SHI evolves within a country, it is important to benchmark the changing nature of its design against pre-determined objectives in order to protect the final integrity of the policy.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Asian and African StudiesHome page
F. Barchiesi
Wage Labor and Social Citizenship in the Making of Post-Apartheid South Africa
Journal of Asian and African Studies, February 1, 2007; 42(1): 39 - 72.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.