DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

AHP기법을 이용한 중국 동부지역의 요양원 경쟁력 비교연구

A Comparative Study of Nursing Homes Competitiveness in China's Eastern Areas Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process Method

  • 초정 (절강 중의약대학교) ;
  • 심재연 (세한대학교 경영학과)
  • Chu, Ting (The School of Nursing, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University) ;
  • Sim, Jae-Yeon (Department of Management, Sehan University)
  • 투고 : 2021.08.13
  • 심사 : 2021.09.10
  • 발행 : 2021.10.31

초록

본 연구는 중국 동부지역 11개 성의 요양원 경쟁력을 비교분석하기 위하여 산업 경쟁력 이론에 근거한 평가지표체계를 설정하고, 계층분석법(AHP)을 이용하였다. 자료는 "중국민정통계연감 2020"의 데이터를 이용하였고, 그 결과 장쑤성은 중국 동부의 11개 성 중 요양원의 경쟁력이 가장 높고 하이난성은 가장 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 경쟁력은 중국 동부의 11개 성에서 차이가 있었다. 요양원 산업 전반에 걸쳐 '의료인력 대비 병상 비율', '요양원 비율', '요양시설 1인당 고정자산', '와상 노인의 수' 등이 크게 영향을 미치는 4대 요인으로, 요양원의 경쟁력에 영향이 있는 것으로 나타났다. 요양원 산업이 합리적으로 발전하고 요양원의 효율성 그리고 서비스의 질이 향상될 수 있도록 지역마다 차별화된 전략을 세워야 한다.

This work aims to use the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) tool to develop the model of industrial competitiveness in the nursing homes of eleven provinces in east China. The original data is from China Civil Affairs Statistical Yearbook 2020. The results show that Jiangsu province has the highest competitiveness in the elderly care industry among the eleven provinces in east China, and Hainan province has the lowest competitiveness. The competitiveness of the elderly care industry varies among the eleven provinces in east China. The ratios of beds to medical staff, the ratio of nursing homes, per capital fixed assets in nursing homes, and the number of unable self-care elderly are the four main influential factors across the competitiveness of the elderly care industry and indicates that the nursing homes competitiveness is affected by multiple factors from multiple levels. A differentiated strategy should be taken according to the circumstances in different provinces to rationally develop the elderly care industry, improving efficiency, the level, and quality of services in the nursing homes.

키워드

과제정보

This Paper was supported by the Sehan University Fund in 2021.

참고문헌

  1. China news http://www.chinanews.com/gn/2015/07-16/7409367.shtml
  2. Chu, T., & Sim, J. (2021). Efficiency evaluation of nursing homes in China's eastern areas Based on DEA-Malmquist Model. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 12(7), 273-282. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2021.12.7.273
  3. Forder, J., & Allan, S. (2014). The impact of competition on quality and prices in the English care homes market. Journal of health economics, 34(100), 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2013.11.010
  4. Frei, F. X., & Harker, P. T. (1999). Measuring aggregate process performance using AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 116(2), 436-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00134-9
  5. Gruneir, A., Lapane, K., Miller, S., & Mor, V. (2007). Long-Term Care Market Competition and Nursing Home Dementia Special Care Units. Medical Care, 45(8), 739-745. https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0b013e3180616c7e
  6. Guo, Y., Wang, L., Peng, J., & Xie, H. (2014). Development of service quality indicators for long-term care facilities. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 49(4), 394-398. https://doi.org/10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2014.04.002
  7. Huang, A., Bu, Z., & Xue, M. (2021). Mengting.Evaluation Index System of Nursing Quality in Nursing Institutions: A Review. Chinese Health Quality Management, 28(3), 047-50.
  8. Huang, S. S., & Hirth, R. A. (2016). Quality rating and private-prices: Evidence from the nursing home industry. Journal of health economics, 50, 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.08.007
  9. shizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336-14345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143
  10. Ministry of Civil Affairs of the People's Republic of China. (2019). Statistical Bulletin of Civil Affairs Development.(in Chinese) http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjgb/
  11. Ministry of Civil Affairs of the People's Republic of China. China Civil Affairs Statistical Yearbook 2020. (in Chinese) http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/
  12. Momaya, K. S., Bhat, S., & Lalwani, L. (2017). Institutional growth and industrial competitiveness: exploring the role of strategic flexibility taking the case of select institutes in India. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 18(2), 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-016-0144-2
  13. Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77-90.
  14. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York, NY: McGraw.
  15. Saaty, T. L. (1988). What is the analytic hierarchy process? Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  16. Schniederjans, M. J., & Wilson, R. L. (1991). Using the analytic hierarchy process and goal programming for information system project selection. Information & Management, 20(5), 333-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-7206(91)90032-W
  17. Starkey, K. B., Weech-Maldonado, R., & Mor, V. (2005). Market competition and quality of care in the nursing home industry. Journal of health care finance, 32(1), 67-81.
  18. Suabate, A. S., H. N. Utami, U. Nimran, & Prasetya, A. (2021). The Effects of Dynamic Capabilities, Entrepreneurial Creativity and Ambidextrous Innovation on Firm's Competitiveness. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(1), 711-721. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2021.VOL8.NO1.711
  19. Troutt, M. D., & Tadisina, S. K. (1992). The analytic hierarchy process as a model base for a merit salary recommendation system. Mathematical and computer modelling, 16(5), 99-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-7177(92)90122-2
  20. Wang, X., & Zhu, C. (2018). Study on the Construction of Brand Competitiveness Evaluation Index System in Senior Care Organizations of China. Standard Science, (7), 107-112.
  21. Zhang, L., Zeng, Y., & Fang, Y. (2019). Construction and Application of Comprehensive Evaluation Index System for Service Quality of Aged Care Institutions. Chinese Journal of Health Statistics, 36(4), 525-527, 531.
  22. Zhao, X. (2016). Competition, information, and quality: Evidence from nursing homes. Journal of health economics, 49, 136-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.05.004