Part,  Chapter, Paragraph

 1  III,    10.  2.  1|            4000 times greater than spending on tobacco control in middle-income
 2  III,    10.  2.  1|         bans in public places, the spending on tobacco control and advertising
 3  III,    10.  2.  1|            particular, increase of spending on tobacco control and the
 4  III,    10.  2.  1|  equivalent to 1.3% of GDP. Actual spending on alcohol-related problems (
 5   IV,    11.  1.  3|     measurement~ ~Since the 1970s, spending on health care has grown
 6   IV,    11.  1.  3|         the limited constraints on spending and growing technical sophistication
 7   IV,    11.  1.  5|      physicians as well as control spending (Walley and Mossialos, 2004).
 8   IV,    11.  2    |          countries in the level of spending on public health and the
 9   IV,    11.  2.  2|    processes (Allin et al 2004).~ ~Spending on public health is extremely
10   IV,    11.  2.  2|             from 1.6% total health spending in 1995 to 2% in 2005),
11   IV,    11.  2.  2|   Netherlands and 3.9% in Finland. Spending on prevention included a
12   IV,    11.  2.  2|           mental illness. However, spending on mental health varies
13   IV,    11.  3.  2|           objectives and to ensure spending on pharmaceuticals is efficient
14   IV,    11.  3.  2|          Table 11.7, the growth in spending on pharmaceuticals as a
15   IV,    11.  3.  2|         proportion of total health spending has been significant in
16   IV,    11.  3.  2|          is less than 60% of total spending in Belgium, Denmark, Estonia,
17   IV,    11.  3.  2|            of total pharmaceutical spending actually declined over the
18   IV,    11.  3.  2|    increase in the public share of spending i.e. Austria, Belgium, Estonia,
19   IV,    11.  3.  2|           HFA 2007).~ ~Table 11.7. Spending on pharmaceuticals as a
20   IV,    11.  3.  2|           as a method for limiting spending on drugs is currently exclusively
21   IV,    11.  6.  1|         average, per capita health spending increased by more than 80%
22   IV,    11.  6.  1|            capita. In 1970, health spending accounted for just 5% of
23   IV,    11.  6.  1|        view that increased welfare spending was sustainable. This resulted
24   IV,    11.  6.  1|            not realized and social spending as a percentage of GDP remained
25   IV,    11.  6.  1|          other areas of government spending may have been rising at
26   IV,    11.  6.  1|        stabilization of healthcare spending growth in many countries
27   IV,    11.  6.  1|          especially high levels of spending reached in France, Switzerland,
28   IV,    11.  6.  1|          witnessed a resurgence in spending in the last decade (as measured
29   IV,    11.  6.  1|      expenditure among the highest spending European countries, such
30   IV,    11.  6.  2|      public contribution to health spending (e.g. Belgium), the central
31   IV,    11.  6.  2|            investment; the rise in spending from 7.3% to 8.3% GDP in
32   IV,    11.  6.  2|          public component of total spending from about 81% to 86%. While
33   IV,    11.  6.  2|           be trade-offs with other spending or transfer programs, tax
34   IV,    11.  6.  2|    healthcare is subject to public spending negotiations which may or
35   IV,    11.  6.  2|         The majority of healthcare spending in the EU derives from public
36   IV,    11.  6.  2|           5% of total expenditure. Spending on PHI as a proportion of
37   IV,    11.  6.  2|         Furthermore, as healthcare spending is primarily driven by supply
38   IV,    11.  6.  2|             exceeding 40% of total spending in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece
39   IV,    11.  6.  2|              Data on out-of-pocket spending are likely underestimated
40   IV,    11.  6.  3|            the incidence of public spending. In order to achieve the
41   IV,    11.  6.  3| progressive system in which public spending benefits the lower income
42   IV,    11.  6.  3|       system, but with less public spending for the poor. However, public
43   IV,    11.  6.  3|          the poor. However, public spending on healthcare may be difficult
44   IV,    11.  6.  3|       separate from overall public spending which may also redistribute
45   IV,    11.  6.  3|     contribution to total non-food spending is identical for all households,
46   IV,    11.  6.  4|      evidence suggests that public spending on health and social assistance
47   IV,    11.  6.  5|      Formal and informal household spending on health: a multicountry
48   IV,    12.  2    |            4000 times greater than spending on tobacco control in middle-income
49   IV,    12.  4    |     demographic change, healthcare spending~ECHO~Humanitarian aid operations.
50   IV,    13.Acr    |      determinants.~ ~Public health spending is extremely difficult to
51   IV,    13.Acr    |             from 1.3% total health spending in 1995 to 2% in 2004),
52   IV,    13.Acr    |         about 0.5% of total health spending in Denmark and 0.6% in Italy,
53   IV,    13.  5    |           a large impact on public spending. While age itself is not
54   IV,    13.  5    |       causal factor of health care spending (but rather the health condition
55   IV,    13.  5    |      pressure for increased public spending unless the above-mentioned
56   IV,    13.  9    |       ageing populations on public spending~on pensions, health and