Author
Listed:
- Tracy, Melissa
- Kruk, Margaret E.
- Harper, Christine
- Galea, Sandro
Abstract
Although there has been substantial debate and research concerning the economic impact of neo-liberal practices, there is a paucity of research about the potential relation between neo-liberal economic practices and population health. We assessed the extent to which neo-liberal policies and practices are associated with population health at the national level. We collected data on 119 countries between 1980 and 2004. We measured neo-liberalism using the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) Index, which gives an overall score as well as a score for each of five different aspects of neo-liberal economic practices: (1) size of government, (2) legal structure and security of property rights, (3) access to sound money, (4) freedom to exchange with foreigners and (5) regulation of credit, labor and business. Our measure of population health was under-five mortality. We controlled for potential mediators (income distribution, social capital and openness of political institutions) and confounders (female literacy, total population, rural population, fertility, gross domestic product per capita and time period). In longitudinal multivariable analyses, we found that the EFW index did not have an effect on child mortality but that two of its components: improved security of property rights and access to sound money were associated with lower under-five mortality (p = 0.017 and p = 0.024, respectively). When stratifying the countries by level of income, less regulation of credit, labor and business was associated with lower under-five mortality in high-income countries (p = 0.001). None of the EFW components were significantly associated with under-five mortality in low-income countries. This analysis suggests that the concept of ‘neo-liberalism’ is not a monolithic entity in its relation to health and that some ‘neo-liberal’ policies are consistent with improved population health. Further work is needed to corroborate or refute these findings.
Suggested Citation
Tracy, Melissa & Kruk, Margaret E. & Harper, Christine & Galea, Sandro, 2010.
"Neo-liberal economic practices and population health: a cross-national analysis, 1980–2004,"
Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 171-199, April.
Handle:
RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:5:y:2010:i:02:p:171-199_99
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Ljungvall, Åsa, 2013.
"The Freer the Fatter? A Panel Study of the Relationship between Body-Mass Index and Economic Freedom,"
Working Papers
2013:23, Lund University, Department of Economics.
- Arno Tausch, 2016.
"Is globalization really good for public health?,"
International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 511-536, October.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:5:y:2010:i:02:p:171-199_99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.