Volltext: Very small countries: economic success against all odds

gative, because we take ranks as dependent variables. The coefficients of the proxy for country size, population, are insignificant for both perfor- mance indicators on a standard significance level. It is, nevertheless, note worthy that the coefficients miss significance on the 5% level by very little in both cases. Contrary to the first picture, where VSC fare very well, there seems to be a slight tendency of smaller countries to exhibit worse health sys - tem performance. From a strict statistical point of view, however, there is no relationship between country size measured by population and health system performance. Two notes are in order. First, we take the log arithms of population and of per capita GDP due to the skewedness of their distributions. Second, the 
tstatistics in parentheses are based on White heteroscedasticity-consistent standard errors due to reasons ex- pounded in Chapter 3. To obtain a more detailed picture, Table 4.10 takes a look at impor- tant health system features and data for our set of VSC. Again, the picture is not clear-cut, mainly due to the heterogeneity of VSC. Health system performance and public expenditure on health differ widely across the selected countries, even across countries with si- milar characteristics and similar per capita GNP. European VSC fare ex- tremely well with regard to their health systems. The «poorest» perfor- mance of the sextet Andorra, Iceland, Luxemburg, Malta, Monaco and San Marino (there are no figures available for Liechtenstein) is rank 16 in the overall health system performance ranking, which is really astoun- ding. The performance of other VSC lacks a clear pattern. Ranks are dis- 111 
Organizational choice: theoretical expectations versus reality Table 4.9: OLS regressions for health system performance and size Dependent variableConstantLogpopLogperAdj. R2Number of capgdpobservations overall health system per-353.475**–4.422–69.699**0.680186 formance – ranking (1–191)(17.427)(–1.745)(–26.788) on level of health –324.880**–5.089–59.637**0.500186 ranking (1–191)(12.323)(–1.570)(–17.650) Sources: WHO (2000), Baratta (1999) ** significant at 1% level; * significant at 5% level; t statistics based on White heteroscedasticity-consi- stent standard errors in parentheses.


Sehr geehrte Benutzerin, sehr geehrter Benutzer,

aufgrund der aktuellen Entwicklungen in der Webtechnologie, die im Goobi viewer verwendet wird, unterstützt die Software den von Ihnen verwendeten Browser nicht mehr.

Bitte benutzen Sie einen der folgenden Browser, um diese Seite korrekt darstellen zu können.

Vielen Dank für Ihr Verständnis.