Financing Common Goods for Health: Core Government Functions in Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management

Peters, David H.; Hanssen, Odd; Gutierrez, Jose C; Abrahams, Jonathan; Nyenswah, Tolbert

doi:10.1080/23288604.2019.1660104

Cited by 13 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results emphasise that critical components of health systems essential to the surge capacity, which can deliver an effective response (eg, human resources and laboratories), need to be in place, and mechanisms for mobilisation need to exist for when an outbreak occurs. 31 This study also shows that, when faced with a decision to adjust PHSM, epidemiological modelling and costing of different scenarios based on different Rt values, often reflecting various policy options, updated frequently and using good local data, can be informative. Whatever the estimated costs of the response, it might be the case that this amount is not fully within the financial capacity of low-income and some middle-income countries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Projected health-care resource needs for an effective response to COVID-19 in 73 low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study

Edejer

Hanssen

Mirelman

et al. 2020

The Lancet Global Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Since WHO declared the COVID-19 pandemic a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, more than 20 million cases have been reported, as of Aug 24, 2020. This study aimed to identify what the additional health-care costs of a strategic preparedness and response plan (SPRP) would be if current transmission levels are maintained in a status quo scenario, or under scenarios where transmission is increased or decreased by 50%. Methods The number of COVID-19 cases was projected for 73 low-income and middle-income countries for each of the three scenarios for both 4-week and 12-week timeframes, starting from June 26, 2020. An input-based approach was used to estimate the additional health-care costs associated with human resources, commodities, and capital inputs that would be accrued in implementing the SPRP. Findings The total cost estimate for the COVID-19 response in the status quo scenario was US$52•45 billion over 4 weeks, at $8•60 per capita. For the decreased or increased transmission scenarios, the totals were $33•08 billion and $61•92 billion, respectively. Costs would triple under the status quo and increased transmission scenarios at 12 weeks. The costs of the decreased transmission scenario over 12 weeks was equivalent to the cost of the status quo scenario at 4 weeks. By percentage of the overall cost, case management (54%), maintaining essential services (21%), rapid response and case investigation (14%), and infection prevention and control (9%) were the main cost drivers. Interpretation The sizeable costs of a COVID-19 response in the health sector will escalate, particularly if transmission increases. Instituting early and comprehensive measures to limit the further spread of the virus will conserve resources and sustain the response.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Projected health-care resource needs for an effective response to COVID-19 in 73 low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study

Edejer

Hanssen

Mirelman

et al. 2020

The Lancet Global Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Government agencies, private companies, and civil society groups can use economic studies to inform their evaluation of past events, management of current challenges, or planning for future risks. This includes tools used by agencies, such as WHO, to estimate the costs of emergencies response plans or the investments needed to improve health emergency and disaster risk management across several countries 27,28 . Economic studies also describe impacts across population groups, which can help identify inequality and hardship linked to socioeconomic and demographic characteristics such as income status, gender, and age 29 …”

Section: What Economic Studies Can Domentioning

confidence: 99%

An introduction to economic studies, health emergencies, and COVID‐19

Clarke

2020

J Evidence Based Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID‐19 pandemic has created widespread harm and disruption. Countries have implemented unprecedented measures to protect the lives and livelihoods of their inhabitants. The scope and composition of these responses are shaped, in part, by research and analysis about the estimated economic impacts of the COVID‐19 Pandemic and proposed responses to it. This analysis outlines basic features and principles involved in economic studies, specifically economic impact studies and economic evaluations, which have formed a significant part of the ever‐increasing evidence base about COVID‐19. This analysis introduces economic studies in this context, highlighting what they can do, their limitations, and key steps involved in conducting them. It highlights examples of economic analysis focused on COVID‐19 and on health emergencies and disasters more broadly. Knowing how economic studies are conducted, and their limitations, will help introduce how their findings can be a useful, usable, and used part of efforts to tackle this global health crisis.

show abstract

“…In the article titled "Core Government Functions in Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management" by Peters, Hanssen, Gutierrez, and Nyenswah, core functional areas for investment and action in health emergency and disaster risk management (EDRM) are described. 41 The authors calculate the costs to establish and operate basic health EDRM capability in low-and middle-income country groups, with a focus on prevention, preparedness, detection, and response capability. The costs of inaction, both direct and indirect, as well as health and other social costs of health and disaster emergencies, are also explored.…”

Section: Finding Our Way Back To Basicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Both Markets and Governments Fail Health

Yazbeck

Soucat

2019

Health Systems & Reform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the rationale and motivation for countries and the global development community to tackle a critical set of functions in the health sector that appear to be under-prioritized and underfunded. The recent eruptions of Ebola outbreaks in Africa and other communicable diseases like Zika and SARS elsewhere led scientific and medical commissions to call for global action. The calls for action motivated the World Health Organization (WHO) to respond by defining a new construct within the health sector: Common Good for Health (CGH). While the starting point for developing the CGH construct was the re-emergence of communicable diseases, it extends to additional outcomes resulting from failures to act and finance within and outside the health sector. This paper summarizes global evidence on failures to address CGHs effectively, identifies potential reasons for the public and private sectors' failures to respond, and lays out the first phase of the WHO program as represented by the papers in this special issue of Health Systems & Reform. OBJECTIVE AND MOTIVATION FOR THIS SPECIAL ISSUEThe last 20 years have seen amazing improvements in health indicators globally. Global attention directed to health has been impressive and resources have been expanding at unprecedented rates. External spending on health grew fivefold since 2000, reaching about $20 billion USD in 2015 1 and health sector resources go beyond external funds. We have known for years that OECD countries, especially the wealthiest, have spending rates that grow faster than economic growth. 2 A recent publication from the World Health Organization (WHO) using global data on health expenditures shows that this expansion is not unique to high-income countries. Between 2000 and 2016, global spending on health has increased at 4% per annum, while the global economy grew at 2.8%. Health spending growth has in fact been even more rapid in low-and middle-income countries -at 6% per year, it amounted to $1.6 trillion USD in 2016. 1

show abstract

Financing Common Goods for Health: Core Government Functions in Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management

Cited by 13 publications

References 23 publications

Projected health-care resource needs for an effective response to COVID-19 in 73 low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study

Projected health-care resource needs for an effective response to COVID-19 in 73 low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study

An introduction to economic studies, health emergencies, and COVID‐19

When Both Markets and Governments Fail Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About