» Articles » PMID: 32959327

With Great Inequality Comes Great Responsibility: the Role of Government Spending on Population Health in the Presence of Changing Income Distributions

Overview
Publisher Springer Nature
Specialty Public Health
Date 2020 Sep 22
PMID 32959327
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To determine the association between provincial government health and social spending and population health outcomes in Canada, separately for men and women, and account for the potential role of income inequality in modifying the association.

Methods: We used data for nine Canadian provinces, 1981 to 2017. Health outcomes and demographic data are from Statistics Canada; provincial spending data are from provincial public accounts. We model the ratio of social-to-health spending ("the ratio") on potentially avoidable mortality (PAM), life expectancy (LE), potential years of life lost (PYLL), infant mortality, and low birth weight baby incidence. We interact the ratio with the Gini coefficient to allow for income inequality modification.

Results: When the Gini coefficient is equal to its average (0.294), the ratio is associated with desirable health outcomes for adult men and women. For example, among women, a 1% increase in the ratio is associated with a 0.04% decrease in PAM, a 0.05% decrease in PYLL, and a 0.002% increase in LE. When the Gini coefficient is 0.02 higher than average, the relationship between the ratio and outcomes is twice as strong as when the Gini is at its average, other than for PAM for women. Infant-related outcomes do not have a statistically significant association with the ratio.

Conclusion: Overall, outcomes for men and women have similar associations with the ratio. Inequality increases the return to social spending, implying that those who benefit the most from social spending reap higher benefits during periods of higher inequality.

Citing Articles

Chasing cancer: does the social-to-medical spending ratio relate to cancer incidence and mortality in Canadian provinces? A retrospective cohort study.

MacLellan C, Kershaw P, Kneebone R, McLaren L, Reiman T, Urquhart R BMJ Public Health. 2025; 2(1):e000858.

PMID: 40018099 PMC: 11812898. DOI: 10.1136/bmjph-2023-000858.


Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the socioeconomic composition of emergency department presentations.

Hanscom D, Dutton D Can J Public Health. 2022; 113(6):878-886.

PMID: 35969354 PMC: 9377289. DOI: 10.17269/s41997-022-00684-y.

References
1.
Evans D, Tandon A, Murray C, Lauer J . Comparative efficiency of national health systems: cross national econometric analysis. BMJ. 2001; 323(7308):307-10. PMC: 37316. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7308.307. View

2.
Lynch J, Davey Smith G, Harper S, Hillemeier M, Ross N, Kaplan G . Is income inequality a determinant of population health? Part 1. A systematic review. Milbank Q. 2004; 82(1):5-99. PMC: 2690209. DOI: 10.1111/j.0887-378x.2004.00302.x. View

3.
Bambra C, Gibson M, Sowden A, Wright K, Whitehead M, Petticrew M . Tackling the wider social determinants of health and health inequalities: evidence from systematic reviews. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2009; 64(4):284-91. PMC: 2921286. DOI: 10.1136/jech.2008.082743. View

4.
Coburn D . Income inequality, social cohesion and the health status of populations: the role of neo-liberalism. Soc Sci Med. 2000; 51(1):135-46. DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00445-1. View

5.
Taylor L, Tan A, Coyle C, Ndumele C, Rogan E, Canavan M . Leveraging the Social Determinants of Health: What Works?. PLoS One. 2016; 11(8):e0160217. PMC: 4988629. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160217. View