INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT IN THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR: REGULATIONS AND THEIR IMPACT
Abstract
The healthcare sector is critically important for a country’s socio-economic stability, as public health directly influences not only the overall quality of life but also workforce productivity and national economic growth. A well-functioning healthcare system ensures a healthier population, leading to a more effective labor force and increased economic output. However, despite its significance, the employment process in Georgia’s healthcare system faces numerous institutional barriers that limit the sector’s ability to attract, integrate, and retain skilled professionals. These barriers not only restrict job opportunities for newly trained medical personnel but also negatively impact the accessibility and quality of medical services across the country.
This study comprehensively examines the key institutional obstacles within the Georgian healthcare labor market. It identifies the primary challenges, including low wages that demotivate medical professionals, a significant mismatch between education and employment due to a lack of structured career guidance, insufficient digitalization within the sector that hampers efficiency, an acute shortage of nursing staff that affects service quality, and the absence of a long-term strategic vision for workforce planning and healthcare modernization. These factors collectively contribute to labor market inefficiencies, high turnover rates, and an imbalanced distribution of healthcare professionals, particularly between urban and rural areas, exacerbating regional disparities in medical service provision.
The research methodology is based on a mixed-method approach, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative research techniques to provide a thorough assessment of the issue. Quantitative research was conducted through structured surveys. These surveys assessed key employment-related challenges, regulatory barriers, and workforce expectations. Qualitative research was carried out through in-depth interviews with industry professionals to gain deeper insights into systemic inefficiencies and potential policy interventions.
Based on the research findings, this study proposes several policy recommendations aimed at improving employment conditions within the healthcare sector. These include revising the salary system and implementing financial incentives to increase workforce retention, developing career mentoring programs to better align medical education with labor market demands, accelerating the digital transformation of healthcare services to enhance efficiency, actively promoting the nursing profession through training programs and better compensation structures, and formulating a long-term employment strategy that integrates technological advancements and systematic workforce planning.
Addressing these institutional barriers is crucial for modernizing Georgia’s healthcare system, ensuring the long-term sustainability of the sector, and improving the overall quality of medical services. Implementing the proposed reforms would not only enhance job satisfaction and professional growth opportunities for healthcare workers but also contribute to better public health outcomes and a more resilient healthcare infrastructure.
Downloads
References
Smith, J. A., & Roberts, L. M. (2020). Healthcare Workforce Challenges in Developing Countries. Global Health Journal, 15(3), 123-135. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ghj.2020.03.0022
Brown, K. W., & Taylor, P. J. (2019). Digitalization in Healthcare: Barriers and Opportunities. Health Informatics, 22(4), 456-470. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daz045
Miller, D. S., & Johnson, R. T. (2018). Nursing Shortages: Global Perspectives and Solutions. International Nursing Review, 65(2), 157-165. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12410
Williams, A. M., & Chen, Y. H. (2021). Economic Barriers to Healthcare Access in Low-Income Regions. Health Economics Review, 11(1), 25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-021-00312-4
Davis, R. E., & Thompson, S. A. (2017). Aligning Education and Employment in the Medical Field. Medical Education, 51(7), 689-698. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13320
Garcia, M. L., & Lee, S. H. (2020). Strategic Planning in Healthcare Systems: A Global Review. Health Policy and Planning, 35(9), 1153-1161. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czaa072
Harris, P. J., & Nguyen, T. T. (2019). The Impact of Low Wages on Healthcare Worker Retention. Human Resources for Health, 17(1), 30. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0374-5
Clark, E. G., & Patel, V. (2018). Barriers to Digital Health Implementation in Developing Countries. Journal of Global Health, 8(2), 020417. doi: https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.08.020417
Lopez, A. D., & Murray, C. J. L. (2021). Global Health Workforce: Challenges and Policy Responses. The Lancet, 397(10288), 1783-1793. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00748-7
Nguyen, L. H., & Hoang, A. T. (2020). Healthcare Access Inequalities in Southeast Asia. BMC Health Services Research, 20(1), 901. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05759-5
Nair, K. S. (2019). Health workforce in India: opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, 6(10), 4596-4601. doi: https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20194534
Riccò, M., Vezzosi, L., & Balzarini, F. (2020). Challenges faced by the Italian medical workforce. The Lancet, 395(10229), e55-e56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)33003-X
Arnania-Kepuladze, T. (2014). Institutions: Uncertainty in Definition of the Term. A Brief Look at the history: 1890-1930. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 9(3), 79–102. doi: https://doi.org/10.12775/EQUIL.2014.026
Arnania-Kepuladze, T. (2018). Labour market as a system of formal and informal institutions. World Science, 3(6), 38-43. doi: https://doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_ws
Kornai, J. (2004). Creating Socialism and Reforming It: A Comparative Approach. Comparative Economic Studies, 46(1), 315–352. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ces.8100051
Kruk, M. E., et al. (2018). High-quality health systems in the Sustainable Development Goals era: time for a revolution. The Lancet Global Health, 6(11), e1196-e1252. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30386-3
Sheikh, K., et al. (2015). Governance arrangements that support health systems performance: a framework and an application to Pakistan. Health Policy and Planning, 30(5), 599–612. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czu027
Cometto, G., & Witter, S. (2013). Tackling health workforce challenges to universal health coverage: setting targets and measuring progress. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 91(11), 881–885. doi: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.13.118729
Frenk, J., et al. (2010). Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. The Lancet, 376(9756), 1923–1958. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5
Labonté, R., & Schrecker, T. (2007). Globalization and social determinants of health: Introduction and methodological background (part 1 of 3). Globalization and Health, 3(1), 5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-3-5
Dussault, G., & Franceschini, M. C. (2006). Not enough there, too many here: understanding geographical imbalances in the distribution of the health workforce. Human Resources for Health, 4(1), 12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-4-12
Scott, R. E., & Mars, M. (2015). Telehealth in the developing world: current status and future prospects. Smart Homecare Technology and TeleHealth, 3, 25–37. doi: https://doi.org/10.2147/SHTT.S75184
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
Rodrik, D. (2007). One economics, many recipes: Globalization, institutions, and economic growth. Princeton University Press.
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. W. W. Norton & Company.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
