Abstract :
This article presents a cross-national analytical framework for
understanding current attempts to reform medical governance – in particular,
those by third parties to control the practice of medicine. The framework pays
particular attention to the ways in which institutions shape policy reform. The
article also outlines the main comparative findings of case studies of selected
reforms and associated processes of negotiations in Denmark, Germany, Italy
and the United Kingdom. These four countries were selected because they are
characterised by theoretically interesting variations in the institutional contexts
of medical governance. The analysis suggests that although all the four countries
have pushed for more control over the way in which doctors practise medicine,
in response to similar imperatives, each country differs in the path it has taken.
More specifically, the instruments and techniques brought to bear in each case
vary considerably and are directed by a country’s political institutions towards a
unique path.
