Deregulation and productivity in healthcare

Abstract

Deregulation and the related rise in competition are generally believed to spur productivity growth. This relationship is one of the main arguments used for the liberalization of healthcare industry. But the exceptional nature of healthcare markets, the presence of asymmetric information and physician-induced demand casts doubt on whether this also holds for the provision of care. Using the healthcare reform of 2006 in the Netherlands, we evaluated how productivity changed when the market was opened to competition. Our results indicate that improvements in productivity were smaller after products were transferred to the liberalized-segment (by 9.5 and 6.6% in 2008 and 2009), suggesting a negative relationship between competition and productivity in healthcare. Our paper also shows that higher levels of productivity gains were reached using hospital budget financing compared to open competition. Competition in healthcare provision has several advantages, such as moderating the growth in product prices and improving patient-choice, but it is more susceptible to physician-induced demand. Meanwhile, budget financing has the advantage of boosting productivity, but the resulting economic gains are generally assumed by the provider. Therefore, we conclude that competition could be socially optimal if volumes and treatment activity could be effectively controlled, and likewise that budgets could be optimal if hospital savings earned through productivity gains could be passed on to society.