作　　者： (）;

机构地区： 华南理工大学

出　　处： 《中国卫生政策研究》 2018年第4期24-28,共5页

摘　　要： 本文从公私合作角度比较商业保险机构参与长期护理保险经办的两种典型模式的异同及应用前景。本文选取了北京市海淀区、青岛市作为典型模式代表。两种模式中商保机构均是由市区政府招标引入,并委托相应机构进行监管,但海淀区模式中商保机构参与度比青岛市模式更深;在盈亏承担方面,海淀区模式比青岛市模式的商保机构承担更多盈亏风险。两种模式的应用前景方面,海淀区模式适合在人口多、经济发达、管理水平高的大城市推广,而青岛市模式更适合在人口规模较小、商业保险机构独立承办风险较大、监管能力较弱的城市实行。 This article attempts to compare the similarities and differences of the two typical models of the commercial insurance institutions participating in the long-term health care insurance from the perspective of public-private partnership and the prospect of its application. By the comparison of the long-term health care insurance operation model in multiple pilot areas,this paper selects Haidian district and Qingdao city as typical representative models. The commercial insurance institutions in the two models are introduced by the urban government bidding and entrusted a corresponding institution to supervise. However,the degree of participation of commercial insurance institutions in the Haidian district model is deeper than that in the Qingdao city model,and in the aspects of profit and loss,the Haidian district model is better than the Qingdao city model. The Qingdao city model of commercial insurance institutions bears more risks of profit and loss. From the point of view of the application prospects of the two models,the Haidian district model is suitable for the promotion of large cities with large population,industrialized economy and high management level,while the Qingdao city model is more suitable for cities with smaller population,higher risk and weak supervisory power of commercial insurance institutions.

关 键 词： 公私合作 长期护理保险 商业保险机构 政府购买

领　　域： []