Browse POLICY Project (1995-2006) Materials
Skip to Keyword List
Skip to Series List
Skip to Country List
- Adolescent Reproductive Health
- Advocacy
- Capacity Building
- Evaluation
- Family Planning/Reproductive Health
- Gender
- HIV/AIDS
- Human Rights
- Planning and Finance
- Research/Models
- Safe Motherhood
- Core Packages-TOO Final Reports
- Core Packages-Progress and Synthesis
- Country Reports
- Manuals, Guidelines
- Maternal and Neonatal Program Effort Index
- Monographs
- Other
- Political Commitment Series
- POLICY Issues in Planning and Finance
- Occasional Papers
- Policy, Plan
- Research Briefs
- General Reports
- Working Papers
- Afghanistan
- Africa
- Angola
- Asia and the Near East
- Argentina
- Brazil
- Benin
- Burkina Faso
- Bangladesh
- Bolivia
- Botswana
- China
- Cambodia
- Cote D'Ivoire
- Congo
- Chad
- Cameroon
- Costa Rica
- Dominican Republic
- Ecuador
- Egypt
- Ethiopia
- El Salvador
- Ghana
- Guinea
- Guatemala
- Haiti
- Honduras
- Indonesia
- India
- Jordan
- Jamaica
- Kenya
- Latin America and the Caribbean
- Laos
- Lesotho
- Madagascar
- Malawi
- Mali
- Morocco
- Mynamar
- Mauritania
- Mexico
- Mozambique
- Nepal
- Nigeria
- Nicaragua
- Namibia
- Niger
- Peru
- Paraguay
- Philippines
- Pakistan
- Panama
- Southern Africa
- Romania
- Russia
- Rwanda
- South Africa
- SAHEL/CERPOD
- Sri Lanka
- Senegal
- Swaziland
- Tanzania
- Tanzania
- Thailand
- Turkey
- Togo
- Uganda
- Ukraine
- Vietnam
- West Africa Regional Program
- Worldwide
- Yemen
- Zimbabwe
- Zambia
Country and regional assignments reflect those made at the time of production and may not correspond to current USAID designations.
Files will load from www.policyproject.com.
List entries are alphabetical by title and contain the title, abstract, language, and then the filename which is hyperlinked and will open in a new browser window. Many files are PDFs but some of the older ones are Word documents.
Specific
As countries try to allocate limited public sector funds for family planning effectively and efficiently, there is increasing interest in understanding and measuring clients' ability to pay for services. If public funds are not sufficient to serve the entire population, they should be targeted to users who are less able to pay. Ideally, women with some ability to pay for health care services should use the private sector, at least for less costly contraceptive methods. This paper presents a methodology for describing the extent to which government subsidies are efficiently applied, that is, to users who could not otherwise afford their contraceptive methods. It examines national family planning markets that include both government and commercial providers and in which government resources are not sufficient to provide universal family planning coverage. Using Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) data from 11 countries, the analysis shows that the commercial sector market share is higher for less expensive contraceptive methods and that women who make use of private sector maternal and child health care services are more likely to use commercial outlets for contraception. Distortions in this general pattern emerge in countries that over-subsidize certain contraceptive methods, particularly oral contraceptives, to the detriment of the commercial sector. Findings from this analysis can provide insights for further exploration of potential problems such as untargeted government subsidies for less expensive methods or lack of access for clinical methods.
English
wps-04.pdf