London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2018 Feb 1;43(1):69-108. doi: 10.1215/03616878-4249814.
Britain's National Health Service (NHS) is a universal, single-payer health system in which the central state has been instrumental in ensuring equity. This article investigates why from the 1970s a policy to achieve equal access for equal need was implemented. Despite the founding principle that the NHS should "universalize the best," this was a controversial policy goal, implying substantial redistribution from London and the South and threatening established medical, political, and bureaucratic interests. Our conceptual approach draws on the advocacy coalition framework (ACF), which foregrounds the influence of research and ideas in the policy process. We first outline the spatial inequities that the NHS inherited, the work of the Resource Allocation Working Party (RAWP), and its new redistributive formula. We then introduce the ACF approach, analyzing the RAWP's prehistory and formation in advocacy coalition terms, focusing particularly on the rise of health economics. Our explanation emphasizes the consensual commitment to equity, which relegated conflict to more technical questions of application. The "buy-in" of midlevel bureaucrats was central to the RAWP's successful alignment of equity with allocative efficiency. We contrast this with the failure of advocacy for equity of health outcomes: here consensus over core beliefs and technical solutions proved elusive.
英国国民医疗服务体系(NHS)是一种全民、单一支付者的医疗体系,中央政府在确保公平方面发挥了重要作用。本文探讨了为什么从 20 世纪 70 年代开始,就实施了一项旨在实现平等需求平等获得的政策。尽管 NHS 的基本原则是“普及最好的服务”,但这是一个有争议的政策目标,意味着从伦敦和南部进行大量再分配,并威胁到既定的医疗、政治和官僚利益。我们的概念方法借鉴了倡导联盟框架(ACF),该框架强调了研究和思想在政策过程中的影响。我们首先概述了 NHS 继承的空间不平等问题、资源分配工作组(RAWP)的工作及其新的再分配公式。然后,我们介绍了 ACF 方法,从倡导联盟的角度分析了 RAWP 的前世今生,特别关注了健康经济学的兴起。我们的解释强调了对公平的共识承诺,这将冲突降级为更具应用性质的技术问题。中层官僚的“认可”是 RAWP 将公平与配置效率成功结合的关键。我们将这与倡导健康结果公平的失败进行了对比:在这里,对核心信念和技术解决方案的共识被证明难以实现。