| Literature DB >> 34222189 |
Jin-Sheng Shen1, Qun Wang1, Han-Pu Shen2.
Abstract
This paper discusses the impact of air pollution on medical expenditure in eastern, central, and western China by applying the fixed-effect model, random-effect model, and panel threshold regression model. According to theoretical and empirical analyses, there are different relationships between the two indexes in different regions of China. For eastern and central regions, it is obvious that the more serious the air pollution is, the more medical expenses there are. However, there is a non-linear single threshold effect between air pollution and health care expenditure in the western region. When air pollution is lower than this value, there is a negative correlation between them. Conversely, the health care expenditure increases with the aggravation of air pollution, but the added value is not enough to make up for the health problems caused by air pollution. The empirical results are basically consistent with the theoretical analysis, which can provide enlightenment for the government to consider the role of air pollution in medical expenditure. Policymakers should arrange the medical budget reasonably, according to its situation, to make up for the loss caused by air pollution.Entities:
Keywords: center; east; health care expenditure; industrial air pollution; panel threshold regression model; west
Year: 2021 PMID: 34222189 PMCID: PMC8249919 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.695664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Descriptive statistics of the variables.
| East | HCE | 5.65 | 7.63 | 3.60 | 0.98 |
| IWG | 10.45 | 11.59 | 8.79 | 0.58 | |
| AP | 2.27 | 2.80 | 1.88 | 0.18 | |
| EL | 2.38 | 10.35 | 0.38 | 2.38 | |
| IL | 9.09 | 10.88 | 1.33 | 2.49 | |
| HSB | 1.32 | 1.92 | 0.76 | 0.35 | |
| Center | HCE | 5.30 | 9.74 | 3.10 | 1.15 |
| IWG | 10.15 | 14.76 | 8.73 | 0.77 | |
| AP | 2.01 | 2.55 | 0.62 | 0.42 | |
| EL | 1.60 | 2.96 | 0.74 | 0.52 | |
| IL | 8.23 | 10.35 | 0.67 | 2.95 | |
| HSB | 2.57 | 10.46 | 0.55 | 3.17 | |
| West | HCE | 5.55 | 7.71 | 3.45 | 1.11 |
| IWG | 10.09 | 12.46 | 6.10 | 1.23 | |
| AP | 2.08 | 2.65 | 1.56 | 0.23 | |
| EL | 2.34 | 4.00 | 0.86 | 0.66 | |
| IL | 9.48 | 10.33 | 8.69 | 0.45 | |
| HSB | 1.15 | 1.85 | 0.39 | 0.37 |
Results of the relationship between the two indexes in eastern China.
| East | Model (1) | IWG | 0.2442*** | 0.0762 | 3.2047 |
| AP | 0.0992 | 0.1402 | 0.7076 | ||
| EL | −0.0663 | 0.0699 | −0.9458 | ||
| IL | 1.5244*** | 0.0738 | 20.6558 | ||
| HSB | 0.5321*** | 0.1121 | 4.7467 | ||
| Model (2) | IWG | 0.2105*** | 0.0597 | 3.5260 | |
| AP | 0.0766 | 0.1299 | 0.5897 | ||
| EL | −0.0803 | 0.0669 | −1.2003 | ||
| IL | 1.5216*** | 0.0680 | 22.3765 | ||
| HSB | 0.5666*** | 0.0934 | 6.0664 |
***, **, and *, respectively, indicate significance at the 1, 5, and 10% level.
Results of the relationship between the two indexes in western China.
| West | Model (1) | IWG | 0.0584 | 0.0491 | 1.1894 |
| AP | 0.5237 | 0.2931 | 1.7868 | ||
| EL | −0.4407*** | 0.0607 | −7.2603 | ||
| IL | 1.7290*** | 0.2090 | 8.2727 | ||
| HSB | 0.2285 | 0.1832 | 1.2473 | ||
| Model (2) | IWG | −0.1071 | 0.0999 | −1.0721 | |
| AP | −0.7252*** | 0.1874 | −3.8698 | ||
| EL | −0.0642 | 0.0634 | −1.0126 | ||
| IL | 2.3486*** | 0.1955 | 12.0133 | ||
| HSB | 0.2516 | 0.1649 | 1.5258 |
***, **, and *, respectively, indicate significance at the 1, 5, and 10% level.
Results of threshold effects between air pollution and health care expenditure.
| West | 9.6785* | 27.0841 | 0.0900 | 9.6785 | 11.1714 | 5.3407 | 0.78 |
*, respectively, indicate significance at 10% level.
Results of threshold effects between air pollution and health care expenditure.
| West | Model (1) | 9.6041** | 24.4703 | 0.0415 | 9.6041 | 11.1714 | 6.3686 | 0.1600 |
| Model (2) | 9.6035* | 27.7899 | 0.0800 | 0.0636 | 11.1708 | 7.0262 | 0.1700 | |
** and *, respectively, indicate significance at the 5 and 10% level.
Results of the relationship between the two indexes in central China.
| Center | Model (1) | IWG | 0.9627*** | 0.0321 | 29.9907 |
| AP | 0.4378 | 0.3518 | 1.2445 | ||
| EL | −0.1648* | 0.0824 | −2.0000 | ||
| IL | 1.0986*** | 0.2047 | 5.3669 | ||
| HSB | 0.2183 | 0.1662 | 1.3135 | ||
| Model (2) | IWG | 0.9117*** | 0.0389 | 23.4370 | |
| AP | 0.0573* | 0.3344 | 1.1714 | ||
| EL | −0.1570 | 0.1009 | −1.5560 | ||
| IL | 1.1857*** | 0.1669 | 7.1043 | ||
| HSB | 0.1309 | 0.1415 | 0.9251 |
*** and *, respectively, indicate significance at the 1 and 10% level.
Estimated coefficients of air pollution and health care expenditure.
| West | −0.0180 | 0.0606 | −0.2970** | 0.0475 | −0.3789*** | |
| 0.0094 | 0.0596 | 0.1577 | 0.0471 | 0.1996** |
OLS se (White se) refers to homogeneous (heterogeneous) standard deviations.
*** and **, respectively, indicate significance at the 5 and 10% level.
Estimated coefficients of the control variables.
| West | 0.6607 | 0.2177 | 3.0349*** | 0.2226 | 2.9681*** | |
| −0.2768 | 0.0860 | −3.2186*** | 0.0821 | −3.3715*** | ||
| −0.2938 | 0.1280 | −2.2953** | 0.1199 | −2.4504 | ||
| 2.0857 | 0.1664 | 12.5343*** | 0.1773 | 11.7637*** |
OLS se (White se) refers to homogeneous (heterogeneous) standard deviations. The estimated coefficients of .