This paper explores whether constitutional litigation contributes to sustaining the equity element of the right to health. Equity entails a fair distribution of the burden of healthcare financing across the different socio-economic groups of the population. A shift towards uncontrolled private healthcare provision and financing raises equity challenges by disproportionately benefitting those who are able to afford such services. The extent to which equity is enforced is an indicator of the strength of the right to health. However, do domestic constitutional courts second-guess, based on equity, policy decisions that impact on healthcare financing? Is it the task of constitutional courts to scrutinize such policy decisions? Under what conditions are courts more likely to do so? The paper addresses these questions by focusing on the case of Hungary, where the right to health has been present in the Fundamental Law adopted in 2010 and the Constitutions preceding it. While the Hungarian Constitutional Court has been traditionally cautious to review policy decisions pertaining to healthcare financing, the system has been struggling with equity issues and successive government coalitions have had limited success in tackling these. The paper discusses the role of constitutional litigation in addressing such equity concerns. In doing so, it contributes to the discussion on the role of domestic constitutional courts in the protection of social and economic rights.
MULTIFILE
With this “invitation for action”, the Diversity, Inclusion & Gender Equality (DIGE) Working Group of the AEC - Empowering Artists as Makers in Society project (hereafter, ARTEMIS) welcomes all the AEC member institutions to explore, discuss and implement practices fostering Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in Higher Music Education (HME). We invite our colleagues to collectively dream up possible futures for HME through DEI work, which responds to the need to accommodate the plurality of backgrounds, artistic paradigms, access capabilities, identities and aspirations amongst current as well as future students and staff. Through this publication we wish to encourage the AEC memberinstitutions to grasp this simultaneously evident and complex task and to explore what diversity, equity and inclusion could mean if musicians are seen as “makers in, for and of society” (Gaunt et al. 2021). For us as a Working Group, this proactive view has been central to our work from the beginning, as we asked ourselves whether HME institutions find themselves predominantly adapting (or not) to inevitable local and global changes and pressures, and whether the HMEinstitutions could see themselves as part of a network of change makers in society. Focusing on the latter, we see DEI work as being directly connected to the core artistic practices of the institutions. As reflections from many of our colleagues in various AEC member institutions illustrate, the commitment to DEI work nurtures artistic imagination, widens pedagogical approaches, and expands the scope of professional practice.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Learning is essential for sustainable employability. However, various factors make work-related learning more difficult for certain groups of workers, who are consequently at a disadvantage in the labour market. In the long term, that in turn can have adverse health implications and can make those groups vulnerable. With a view to encouraging workers to continue learning, the Netherlands has a policy on work-related learning, which forms part of the 'Vitality Package'.Aim: A Health Impact Assessment with equity focus (HIAef) was undertaken to determine whether the policy on work-related learning affected certain groups of workers and their health in different ways, and whether the differences were avoidable.Methods: The HIAef method involved the standard phases: screening, scoping, appraisal and recommendations. Equity was the core principle in this method. Data were collected by means of both literature searches (e.g., Scopus, Medline) and interviews with experts and stakeholders (e.g., expertise regarding work, training and/or health).Results: The HIAef identified the following groups as potentially vulnerable in the field of work-related learning: the chronically sick, older people, less educated people, flexi-workers/the self-employed and lay carers (e.g., thresholds to learning). Published literature indicates that work-related learning may have a positive influence on health through (work-related) factors such as pay, employability, longer employment rate and training-participation. According to experts and stakeholders, work-related learning policy could be adapted to take more account of vulnerable groups through alignment with their particular needs, such as early support, informal learning and e-learning.Conclusion: With a view to reducing avoidable inequalities in work-related learning, it is recommended that early, low-threshold, accessible opportunities are made available to identified vulnerable groups. Making such opportunities available may have a positive effect on (continued) participation in the labour market and thus on the health of the relevant groups.
DOCUMENT
