慶應義塾大学 経済学部 PEARL入試 志望理由書 提出例(崔 在東先生ゼミ向け)

慶應義塾大学 経済学部 PEARL入試 志望理由書 提出例(崔 在東先生ゼミ向け)

Dr. Choi Jaedong

Professor

Department of Economics, Modern Economic History

Keio University

Dear Professor Jaedong,

I am writing this letter to explain my purpose in applying for Department of Economics at Keio University, specializing in Modern Economic History. I have read a number of your published work which I was very intrigued by. I would be extremely grateful if you could kindly give this a read. 

Abstract
After the Russian Revolution in 1917, the Bolshevik government introduced insurance such as crop insurance and life insurance as national compulsory insurance in addition to fire insurance and livestock insurance. Thanks to that, as in all fifteen Soviet Republics, health care financing was a tax-based centralized system providing universal health care coverage. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the ability of each independent government to maintain this system diminished. In common knowledge, independence in those countries was a sudden political, social and economic turning event, and even though Politicians tried to cope with the challenges in all state sectors including health care, the outcome may not have been very successful and this is witnessed by the fact that about 90% of healthcare expenses are currently financed through out-of-pocket payments (OPP).

Discussion
In fact, countries such as Georgia, Armenia and Ukraine were not very well equipped to tackle the sudden political and socio-economic changes. The adoption process unfolded in multiple phases – 1. Moving healthcare management to under the governance of regional governments to allocate resources, contract with providers, monitor service quality and planning programs. 2. Re-centralizing the process in order to solve inequality followed by privatization to match free market 3. Launching universal program to a much bigger mass by increasing the state owned budget.

Findings
The core financial reforms in the healthcare sector have focused on privatisation along with a radical shift of the strongly hierarchical and soviet centralized system towards a liberal market based system. Among the inheritance from the Soviet area was a low medical quality of care especially in the rural areas, despite privatization and re-centralization, so far no significant changes in the quality of care have been witnessed. Moreover, free market-based health care system had a negative effect on quality of healthcare as similar phenomenon is prague in the U.S. Some studies showed that consumers perceived quality of care as poor and stated the necessity to improve the quality of services, especially at the primary care level.


Conclusion
Access to health care and within-country inequalities appear to have improved a little over the past decade. However, considerable problems remain, including out-of-pocket payments and unaffordability despite efforts to improve financial protection and lack of regulations for private companies running programs. I believe it is an important mission for us to study correlation between market innovation, socio economic changes and public sectors in order to shed light on some areas consumers may not have visibility to. I would love to take part in your seminar to conduct meaningful research. Thank you very much for taking the time and I look forward to hearing from you on this matter.

Sincerely Yours,

 

*Balabanova D, Coker R. Health Systems of Russia and Former USSR. In: Heggenhougen K, Quah S, editors. International Encyclopedia of Public Health. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 2008.

AO入試・小論文に関するご相談・10日間無料添削はこちらから

「AO入試、どうしたらいいか分からない……」「小論文、添削してくれる人がいない……」という方は、こちらからご相談ください。
(毎日学習会の代表林が相談対応させていただきます!)

コメントを残す

メールアドレスが公開されることはありません。 * が付いている欄は必須項目です