VIDEO: UHC has increasingly become a key target on the global health agenda and is highly promoted by international organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Bank. Despite the global commitment to UHC, mainly developed countries have achieved its implementation so far. Little is known about developing countries, above all Sub-Saharan Africa, due to a lack of approaches how to measure progress towards UHC in a manner that also allows for context-sensitivity. Therefore this paper introduces a UHC-Index (UHCI) that covers the three dimensions of coverage, services and financial risk protection. While the first two dimensions are covered by the UHC-tracer developed by Lim et al (2016), the latter dimension is approximated by the out-of-pocket expenditure as a percentage of private expenditure on health. In addition to providing a snapshot of the status quo of progress towards UHC in Africa, the UHCI is also used to identify determinants that facilitate the implementation of UHC. Based on these determinants, the authors recommend a UHC strategy that covers the full population from the very start with an essential package of services that will be extended over time, instead of targeting limited groups first.
Why Dual Vocational Training (Apprenticeship training, ‘Lehre’)? Dual vocational training (DVT) is internationally recognized as a good practice in tackling youth-unemployment and in integrating vulnerable adolescents into society. “Out of around 50 refugees enrolled in higher vocational schools, only one managed to graduate”, whereas for DVT the number of successful graduates is higher (Albl (lobby. 16): January 13, 2017). DVT offers a practical orientation through learning by doing. There is a high interest from refugees in the practical orientation of DVT. DVT builds upon existing public services and programs (eg. Jugend College and Kompetenz Check). DVT enables refugees to gradually adjust to the realities of working within an Austrian company. DVT allows refugees to burst the ‘social bubble’1 in a way that potentially facilitates a smoother transition into the labor market through a multi-level learning process (personal, social, cultural, and professional).
The recent “Brexit” referendum win as well as the rise of parties campaigning for other “exits”, can in many ways be thought of as the logical outcome of the paradoxes of the neoliberal labour relation policies that the EU has (largely) supported until now. To what extent is the direction of this discontent valid when it comes to labour relations, however? Is the EU to blame for the worsening wage share in Austria or is is simply a scapegoat?