The regulation of private hospitals in Asia

Authors

  • Rosemary Morgan,

    Corresponding author
    1. Global Public Health Unit, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
    • Correspondence to: R. Morgan, Global Public Health Unit, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Chrystal MacMillan Building, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, UK. E-mail: rosemary.morgan@ed.ac.uk

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Tim Ensor

    1. Nuffield Centre for International Health and Development, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
    Search for more papers by this author

SUMMARY

Private providers play a significant role in the provision of health services in low and middle income countries (LMICs), and the number of private hospitals is increasing rapidly. The growth of the sector has drawn attention to the many problems that are often associated with this sector and the need for effective regulation if private providers are to contribute to the effective provision of healthcare. This paper outlines three main regulatory strategies—command and control, incentives, and self-regulation, providing examples of each approach in Asia. Traditionally, command and control regulatory instruments have dominated the regulation of private hospitals in Asia; however, when deciding on which approach is most appropriate, it is important to consider the goal of the regulation, the context in which it is to be implemented, and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. This paper concludes that regulation needs to extend beyond command and control to include a full range of mechanisms. Doing so will help address many of the challenges found within individual approaches, in addition to helping address the regulatory challenges particular to many LMICs. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Ancillary