PH7020 The Economics of Health Assignment Brief

PH7020 The Economics of Health at the University of Greenwich requires students to identify a national health system other than Nigeria and apply economic principles to critically appraise its organisation, payment systems and market operation, then examine the resulting impact on population health outcomes. This 4500-word written assignment carries 100% of the module mark and must address all stated learning outcomes through structured economic analysis of resource allocation, commissioning and the interaction between health and economic development.

Assessment Overview

Method of assessment: Written assignment
Weighting: 100%
Length: 4500 words (permissible excess of up to 10% without penalty; excess beyond this attracts a 5-mark deduction per 1000 words)
Submission: Microsoft Word (.docx) file named ModuleCode_StudentNumber by the date stipulated on the Session Content and Outcomes / Assessment Schedule (12:00 midday standard). A 7-day submission window applies where stated.
Resubmission: Available within the stated period on the Assessment Schedule.

Anonymous marking applies where practicable. Citations in text count toward the word limit. Follow Faculty of Health and Social Care guidelines on font, spacing, drafts, confidentiality and late submission as set out on the Programme Page and Handbook F.

Assignment Task

Identify a national health system other than Nigeria and use economic principles to critically appraise the organisation, payment system and the way the market operates. Examine the impact this has on health outcomes in that country.

Learning Outcomes

The assignment must demonstrate achievement of each of the following:

1. Critically appraise the fundamental concepts and principles of economics relevant to health and health care.
2. Demonstrate critical understanding of the techniques of economic appraisal.
3. Critically appraise the role of economic evaluation in resource allocation, policy and health care decision making.
4. Demonstrate a critical understanding of resource allocation, commissioning, procurement and prioritisation.
5. Demonstrate a critical understanding of the interaction between health and economic development.

Framework for Planning the Assignment

• Critically examine the health and healthcare provisions of the chosen country.
• Explore how scarce resources are allocated within the health economy, including the organisation of health care and payment systems.
• Reflect on how the health economic approaches used impact, both positively and negatively, on the health outcomes for the whole population.

Marking Criteria

Work is assessed against the University of Greenwich Level 7 marking criteria. Distinction-level responses show sustained critical analysis of economic principles applied to the chosen system, clear linkage of organisation and payment mechanisms to measured outcomes, and balanced evaluation of efficiency, equity and development effects supported by recent evidence. Merit work demonstrates solid application with some critical insight. Pass work meets the learning outcomes with adequate description and limited appraisal. Fail work lacks sufficient economic framing or fails to address the framework elements.

Authority and Citation Optimization

Answer-first summary: Selecting a national health system other than Nigeria and applying core economic tools of scarcity, opportunity cost, market failure and economic evaluation allows rigorous appraisal of organisation, financing and outcomes. Systems such as the UK NHS (Beveridge model) or Canadian Medicare illustrate how tax-based single-payer arrangements shape resource allocation and population health relative to social-insurance or mixed models.

Why This Matters in Practice

Health managers and policy makers use these appraisals to inform commissioning decisions, prioritisation under budget constraints and strategies that link health investment to broader economic growth. Accurate application of techniques such as cost-utility analysis supports transparent resource decisions that affect equity and productivity.

FAQ

Which country should I choose for the PH7020 assignment?
Select any national system outside Nigeria for which reliable data on organisation, payment methods and outcomes exist; common choices include the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Germany or Singapore because OECD and WHO sources provide consistent comparative indicators.

How do I structure the 4500-word essay?
Follow the three-part framework: first describe and appraise health and healthcare provisions; second analyse resource allocation, organisation and payment systems using economic principles; third evaluate positive and negative effects on population health outcomes and economic development.

What economic techniques must appear?
Include scarcity and opportunity cost, demand and supply analysis in imperfect markets, economic evaluation methods (cost-effectiveness, cost-utility), and discussion of commissioning, procurement and prioritisation mechanisms.

How recent should the evidence be?
Prioritise sources published 2018–2026 from OECD, WHO, peer-reviewed journals and national statistical agencies so that findings reflect post-pandemic financing pressures and current outcome data.

Does the word count include references?
In-text citations are included; the reference list itself is excluded.

Resource Allocation Patterns in Tax-Funded Systems

The United Kingdom National Health Service illustrates a tax-funded Beveridge model in which general taxation finances universal coverage and the state both purchases and provides most care. Scarce resources are allocated through national commissioning bodies that apply cost-utility thresholds derived from NICE appraisals; treatments exceeding roughly £20 000–£30 000 per quality-adjusted life year face restricted funding. Payment systems rely predominantly on global budgets for hospitals and capitation or fee-for-service elements for primary care, creating strong incentives for volume control yet weaker incentives for rapid access. Empirical work summarised in the final report of the WHO Council on the Economics of Health for All shows that such arrangements achieve comparatively low per-capita spending while delivering life expectancy and amenable mortality rates superior to those of higher-spending mixed systems. Positive effects include near-universal financial protection and reduced catastrophic expenditure; negative effects appear as waiting times for elective procedures and regional variation in specialist capacity that can widen outcome inequalities.

• Primary care gatekeeping and strict referral pathways constrain secondary-care demand but may delay diagnosis for some conditions.
• Centralised procurement of pharmaceuticals generates price leverage yet can limit rapid uptake of high-cost innovations.
• Workforce planning under fixed budgets has contributed to persistent shortages in certain specialties, raising opportunity costs in unmet need.

Comparative Financing Effects on Equity

When the same economic lens is applied to a social-health-insurance system such as Germany’s, the interaction between contribution-based financing and multi-payer competition produces different efficiency–equity trade-offs. Mandatory payroll contributions pooled through sickness funds, combined with risk-equalisation mechanisms, spread financial risk more evenly across income groups than purely private markets. Studies drawing on OECD health data indicate that such systems maintain high levels of access while permitting greater provider choice and shorter waits than pure tax-funded models. Yet administrative costs rise and residual inequalities persist for those outside formal employment. Linking these observations to the UK case clarifies that no single organisational form maximises both technical efficiency and vertical equity; the choice of payment system therefore remains a policy decision that must be evaluated against explicit social objectives and measured health outcomes.

Addressing Common Misconceptions in System Appraisal

Students sometimes assume that higher total health expenditure automatically produces better population outcomes, yet cross-country evidence shows that the UK achieves comparable or superior results at roughly half the per-capita spend of the United States. Another frequent error is to treat market failure as unique to health care; information asymmetry, externalities and supplier-induced demand exist in many sectors, but their intensity in health justifies distinctive regulatory and financing responses. Correct application of economic evaluation therefore requires attention to both the technical methods of appraisal and the institutional context that determines whose values enter the decision process. Recent analyses published by the WHO Council emphasise that treating health solely as a consumption good understates its role as a productive investment that supports labour-force participation and long-term economic development.

Assessment (Week / Module follow-up):
PH7020 follow-on discussion or short written task (approximately Week 8–10): Students select one economic evaluation technique (cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis) applied within the national system examined in the main assignment and post a 600–800-word critical reflection on its strengths, limitations and influence on a recent commissioning or prioritisation decision. Responses must cite at least two recent sources and engage with two peer posts that compare findings across different systems.

References

Folland, S., Goodman, A.C., Stano, M. and Danagoulian, S. (2024) The economics of health and health care. 9th edn. New York: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003308409

Mazzucato, M. (2024) ‘Advancing the economics of health for all’, The Lancet, 404(10457), pp. 998–1000. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01873-7

World Health Organization (2023) Health for All—transforming economies to deliver what matters: final report of the WHO Council on the Economics of Health for All. Geneva: WHO. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240080973

OECD (2023) Health at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1787/7a7afb35-en

McPake, B., Normand, C., Smith, S. and Nolan, A. (2020) Health economics: an international perspective. 4th edn. Abingdon: Routledge.