This article explores the relationship between public sector employment and population health both theoretically and quantitatively. First, we build a theoretical framework to situate public employment in the literature that explores the link between politics and health. We argue that public employment, as an instrument of pro-redistributive policies in both the labor market and the welfare state, improves equality and ultimately health. Second, based on a cross-country dataset from the 1980s, and by applying regression analysis and outlier identification techniques, we find that population health measured by life expectancy improves with the size of public employment. The association is stronger for countries with lower income and for women. When policymakers contemplate downsizing state enterprises and government functions, they should consider the health effect of public employment.
MegginsonWL.Privatization Trends and Major Deals in 2015 and 2016. Two Record Years Herald an Ongoing Privatization Wave.
Milan, Italy:
Privatization Barometer; 2017:5–32. The PB Report 2015/2016.
4.
PempetzoglouMPatergiannakiZ.Debt-driven water privatization: the case of Greece.Eur J Multidiscip Stud. 2017;
5(1):102–111.
5.
MercilleJMurphyE.Conceptualising European privatisation processes after the Great Recession.Antipode. 2016;
48(3):685–704.
6.
Privatization Barometer. Two Record Years Herald an Ongoing Privatization Wave.
Milan, Italy:
Privatization Barometer; 2017. The PB Report 2015/2016.
7.
European Commission. State-Owned Enterprises in the EU: Lessons Learnt and Ways in a Post Crisis Context. Luxembourg City
, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union;2016. Institutional Paper 031.
8.
EstrinSPelletierA.Privatization in developing countries: what are the lessons of recent experience?World Bank Res Obser. 2018;
33(1):65–102.
9.
CullRPeriaMSMVerrierJ.Bank Ownership: Trends and Implications.
Washington, DC:
International Monetary Fund; 2017. IMF Working Papers, WP1706.
WangSHaqueMLambS.Does transfer of control rights and private benefits of control increase efficiency? Evidence from China’s privatization of the SOE’s.J Chinese Econ Bus Stud. 2016;
14(4):329–346.
12.
MühlenkampH.From state to market revisited: a reassessment of the empirical evidence on the efficiency of public (and privately-owned) enterprises.Ann Public Coop Econ. 2015;
86(4):535–557.
13.
VictorOEAzizNAJaffarAR.Privatization of electricity service delivery in developing nations: issues and challenges. Int J Built Environ Sustain. 2015;
2(3):202–210.
14.
ErdenLBolatogluN.Fiscal responses to privatisation in transition economies: an empirical assessment.J Int Dev. 2015;
27(1):133–143.
15.
ZhuA.Public Enterprises in Mixed Economies: Their Impact on Economic Growth and Social Equity [dissertation].
Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Amherst; 2005.
16.
ClòSFerrarisMFlorioM.Public enterprises in a global perspective in the last decade. L'industria. 2015;
36(1):111–138.
17.
FowlerPCRichardsDG.Test evidence for the OECD countries, 1965-85: the relationship between the size of the public enterprise sector and economic growth. Int J Soc Econ. 1995;
22(3):11–23.
18.
OlssonMTågJ.What is the cost of privatization for workers?
Stockholm, Sweden:
Research Institute of Industrial Economics (IFN); 2018. IFN Working Paper No. 1201.
19.
HermannC.The role of the public sector in combating inequality. Int J Lab Res. 2014;
6(1):113–128.
20.
MilanovićB.Determinants of cross-country income inequality: an ‘augmented’ Kuznets hypothesis. In: FranicevicVUvalicM, eds. Equality, Participation, Transition: Essays in Honour of Branko Horvat.
London, England:
Palgrave Macmillan; 2000:48–79.
21.
AlesinaABaqirREasterlyW.Redistributive public employment.J Urban Econ. 2000;
48(2):219–241.
22.
MuntanerCNgEChungHPrinsSJ.Two decades of Neo-Marxist class analysis and health inequalities: a critical reconstruction.Soc Theor Health. 2015;
13(3–4):267–287.
23.
KickbuschI.The political determinants of health-10 years on. BMJ. 2015;
350:h81.
24.
MackenbachJP.Political determinants of health.Eur J Public Health. 2014;
24(1):2.
25.
BeckfieldJKriegerN.Epi+ demos+ cracy: linking political systems and priorities to the magnitude of health inequities – evidence, gaps, and a research agenda.Epidemiol Rev. 2009;
31(1):152–177.
26.
NavarroV.Has socialism failed? An analysis of health indicators under capitalism and socialism. Sci Soc. 1993;
57:6–30.
27.
NavarroVMuntanerCBorrellCet al.
Politics and health outcomes.Lancet. 2006;
368(9540):1033–1037.
28.
NavarroVShiL.The political context of social inequalities and health.Soc Sci Med. 2001;
52(3):481–491.
29.
HuberEStephensJD.Development and Crisis of the Welfare State: Parties and Policies in Global Markets.
Chicago, MI:
University of Chicago Press; 2001.
30.
ToninelliPM.The Rise and Fall of State-Owned Enterprise in the Western World.
Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press; 2000.
MuntanerCLynchJOatesGL.The social class determinants of income inequality and social cohesion.Int J Health Serv. 1999;
29(4):699–732.
33.
SevillanoJMMVillalongaJR.Public employment and regional redistribution in Spain. Hacienda Pública Española. 2004;
170(3):59–80.
34.
RamanadhamVV.Public Enterprise and Income Distribution.
Abingdon, England:
Routledge; 1988.
35.
Appiah-KubiK.State-owned enterprises and privatisation in Ghana. J Mod Afr Stud. 2001;
39(2):197–229.
36.
TerrellK.Public-private wage differentials in Haiti Do public servants earn a rent?J Dev Econ. 1993;
42(2):293–314.
37.
BlankRM, ed. Social Protection vs. Economic Flexibility: Is There a Tradeoff?
Chicago, MI:
University of Chicago Press; 2009.
38.
HyderAReillyB.The public and private sector pay gap in Pakistan: a quantile regression analysis. Pakistan Dev Rev. 2005;
44(3):271–306.
39.
DepaloDGiordanoRPapapetrouE.Public–private wage differentials in Euro-area countries: evidence from quantile decomposition analysis.Empir Econ. 2015;
49(3):985–1015.
40.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises. 2015 ed.
Paris, France:
OECD; 2016.
41.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises: A Survey of OECD Countries.
Paris, France:
OECD; 2005.
42.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Professionalising Boards of Directors of State-Owned Enterprises: Stocktaking of National Practices.
Paris, France:
OECD; 2018.
43.
LuciforaCMeursD.The public sector pay gap in France, Great Britain and Italy.Rev Income Wealth. 2006;
52(1):43–59.
44.
DomeijDLjungqvistL.Wage structure and public sector employment: Sweden versus the United States 1970-2002.
Stockholm, Sweden:Stockholm School of Economics, The Economic Research Institute; 2006. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance No. 638.
45.
ValentineLMattoonRH. Public and private sector compensation: what is affordable in this recession and beyond? – a conference summary. Chicago Fed Letter. 2009; May: no. 262a.
46.
AntónJIde BustilloRM.Public-private sector wage differentials in Spain: an updated picture in the midst of the Great Recession.Investigación Económica. 2015;
74(292):115–157.
47.
ChristopoulouRMonastiriotisV. Public-private wage duality during the Greek crisis.Oxford Econ Pap. 2015;
68(1):174–196.
48.
MorikawaM.A comparison of the wage structure between the public and private sectors in Japan.J Jpn Int Econ. 2016;
39:73–90.
49.
KatzLFKruegerAB.Changes in the structure of wages in the public and private sectors. Res Labor Econ. 1991;
12:137–172.
50.
FreemanRB.How do public sector wages and employment respond to economic conditions? In: WiseD, ed. Public Sector Payrolls.
Chicago, MI:
University of Chicago Press; 1987:183–216.
51.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor Force Statistics From the Current Population Survey: Table 12. Employed Persons by Sex, Occupation, Class of Worker, Full- or Part-Time Status, and Race.
Washington, DC:
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat12.htm. Accessed June 1, 2018.
52.
AlestaloMBislevSFuråkerB.Public employment and class formation.Int J Sociol. 1991;
21(2):91–118.
53.
FredrikssonPTopelRH.Wage determination and employment in Sweden since the early 1990s: wage formation in a new setting. In: FreemanRBSwedenborgBTopelRH, eds. Reforming the Welfare State: Recovery and Beyond in Sweden.
Chicago, MI:
University of Chicago Press; 2010:83–126.
54.
World Bank. Gender and Development in the Middle East and North Africa: Women in the Public Sphere.
Washington, DC:
The World Bank; 2004. MENA Development Report No. 28815.
55.
WonSY.State policy? Traditional gender stereotypes? Relative contributions of factors affecting positive work–family interface for working mothers in Korea. Gend Work Organ. 2016;
23(2):147–164.
56.
SoomroJAShaikhZNBijaraniSASaheerTB.Factors affecting breastfeeding practices among working women in Pakistan.E Mediterr Health J. 2016;
22(11):810.
57.
ContiMSetteE.Type of employer and fertility of working women: does working in the public sector or in a large private firm matter?Camb J Econ. 2013;
37(6):1303–1333.
58.
HallEWiltonR.Alternative spaces of ‘work’ and inclusion for disabled people.Disabil Soc. 2011;
26(7):867–880.
59.
Infante-RivardCLortieM.Prognostic factors for return to work after a first compensated episode of back pain.Occup Environ Med. 1996;
53(7):488–494.
60.
WoodhamsCCorbyS.Then and now: disability legislation and employers' practices in the UK.Brit J Ind Relat. 2007;
45(3):556–580.
61.
RoseNE.Put to Work: The WPA and Public Employment in the Great Depression.
New York, NY:
Monthly Review Press; 2009.
62.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey: Table 8. Employed Persons by Class of Worker. Washington DC: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employed Persons by Class of Worker. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab8.htm (accessed 1 June, 2018).
CusackTRNotermansTReinM.Political-economic aspects of public employment.Eur J Polit Res. 1989;
17(4):471–500.
65.
Rovira TorresF.Public Sector Employment and Support for the Welfare State: A Multilevel Assessment of 15 Advanced Capitalist Countries [master’s thesis].
Stockholm, Sweden:
Stockholm Universitet; 2012.
MegginsonWLNashRCvan RandenborghM.The financial and operating performance of newly privatized firms: an international empirical analysis.J Financ. 1994;
49(2):403–452.
68.
BoubakriNCossetJC.The financial and operating performance of newly privatized firms: evidence from developing countries.J Finance. 1998;
53(3):1081–1110.
69.
MegginsonWLNetterJM.From state to market: a survey of empirical studies on privatization.J Econ Lit. 2001;
39(2):321–389.
70.
BortolottiBD’SouzaJFantiniMMegginsonWL.Privatization and the sources of performance improvement in the global telecommunications industry.Telecommun Policy. 2002;
26(5–6):243–268.
71.
BaylissK. Privatization and poverty: the distributional impact of utility privatization.Ann Public Coop Econ. 2002;
73(4):603–625.
72.
HodgeG.Privatization: An International Review of Performance.
Boulders, CO:
Westview Press; 2000.
73.
DavisKStremikisKSquiresDSchoenC.Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: How the Performance of the U.S. Health Care System Compares Internationally.
New York, NY:
Commonwealth Fund; 2014.
74.
BasuSAndrewsJKishoreSPanjabiRStucklerD.Comparative performance of private and public healthcare systems in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review.PLoS Med. 2012;
9(6):e1001244. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001244
75.
JudgeKMulliganJABenzevalM.Income inequality and population health.Soc Sci Med. 1998;
46(4–5):567–579.
76.
WilkinsonRGPickettKE.Income inequality and population health: a review and explanation of the evidence.Socl Sci Med. 2006;
62(7):1768–1784.
77.
PickettKEWilkinsonRG.Inequality: an underacknowledged source of mental illness and distress.Brit J Psychiat. 2010;
197(6):426–428.
78.
PickettKEWilkinsonRG.Income inequality and health: a causal review.Soc Sci Med. 2015;
128:316–326.
79.
SummersRHestonA.The Penn World Table (Mark 5): an expanded set of international comparisons, 1950–1988.Q J Econ. 1991;
106(2):327–368.
80.
MilanovicB.Determinants of Cross-Country Income Inequality: An Augmented Kuznets Hypothesis.
Washington, DC:
The World Bank; 1994:1–62. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper WPS1246.
81.
World Bank. World Development Indicators Online Database.
Washington, DC:
The World Bank. https://data.worldbank.org/ (accessed 1 June, 2018).
MarerPArvayJO'ConnorJCet al. Historically Planned Economies: A Guide to the Data.
Washington, DC:
The World Bank; 1992. World Bank Publication 10950.
84.
RodgersGB.Income and inequality as determinants of mortality: an international cross-section analysis.Pop Stud. 1979;
33(2):343–351.
85.
YamoriY.Food factors for atherosclerosis prevention: Asian perspective derived from analyses of worldwide dietary biomarkers. Exp Clin Cardiol. 2006;
11(2):94–98.
86.
SinghPNSabatéJFraserGE.Does low meat consumption increase life expectancy in humans?Am J Cli Nutr. 2003;
78(3):526S–532S.
87.
SamarasTTElrickHStormsLH.Is height related to longevity?Life Sci. 2003;
72(16):1781–1802.
88.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Government at a Glance.
Paris, France:
OECD; 2017.
89.
National Bureau of Statistics of China. China Statistical Yearbook, Multiple Years.
Beijing, China:
National Bureau of Statistics of China.
90.
United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical Update.
New York, NY:
United Nations Development Programme; 2018.
