Financing Global Common Goods for Health: When the World is a Country

Yamey, Gavin; Jamison, Dean T.; Hanssen, Odd; Soucat, Agnès

doi:10.1080/23288604.2019.1663118

Cited by 38 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…22 ) In another contribution to this special issue, Yamey and colleagues summarize the best available estimate of the annual price tag for critical global CGH. 2 In total, they write, at least an additional $9.5 billion is needed annually, and this is likely a highly conservative number (e.g., it does not include the estimated costs of malaria eradication, which will soon be presented by The Lancet Commission on Malaria Eradication). The trends identified in our study suggest that there will continue to be a large need for funding for years to come.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six years later, many critical CGH remain underfunded. 2 Unless international funders further ramp up their support for global health-and establish sustainable financing to ensure ongoing, timely and appropriate levels of funding-existing health ODA should be reallocated towards global CGH. This reallocation can be achieved over time by redirecting country-specific funding from countries that become able to provide their own resources.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is aligned with findings from the CIH and The Lancet Commission on Tuberculosis. 9,13 As discussed by Yamey et al, 2 while the benefits of supporting global functions are transnational, these investments can be made at different levels:…”

Section: Methodology Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yamey and colleagues have described how the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic exposed the relative neglect of several global CGH. 2 For example, under-funding of product development for neglected and emerging infectious diseases of poverty meant that no disease-specific control tools were available (i.e., there was no Ebola vaccine, therapeutic, or rapid diagnostic test), while regional surveillance systems under-performed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

International Funding for Global Common Goods for Health: An Analysis Using the Creditor Reporting System and G-FINDER Databases

Schäferhoff¹,

Chodavadia

Martínez³

et al. 2019

Health Systems & Reform

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

West Africa's Ebola epidemic of 2014-2016 exposed, among other problems, the under-funding of transnational global health activities known as global common goods for health (CGH), global functions such as pandemic preparedness and research and development (R&D) for neglected diseases. To mobilize sustainable funding for global CGH, it is critical first to understand existing financing flowing to different types of global CGH. In this study, we estimate trends in international spending for global CGH in 2013, 2015, and 2017, encompassing the era before and after the Ebola epidemic. We use a measure of international funding that combines official development assistance (ODA) for health with additional international spending on R&D for diseases of poverty, a measure called ODA+. We classify ODA+ into funding for three global functions-provision of global public goods, management of cross-border externalities, and fostering of global health leadership and stewardship-and country-specific aid. International funding for global functions increased between 2013 and 2015 by $1.4 billion to a total of $7.3 billion in 2015. It then declined to $7.0 billion in 2017, accounting for 24% of all ODA+ in 2017. These findings provide empirical evidence of the reactive nature of international funders for global CGH. While international funders increased funding for global functions in response to the Ebola outbreak, they failed to sustain that funding. To meet future global health challenges proactively, international funders should allocate more funding for global functions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodology Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

International Funding for Global Common Goods for Health: An Analysis Using the Creditor Reporting System and G-FINDER Databases

Schäferhoff¹,

Chodavadia

Martínez³

et al. 2019

Health Systems & Reform

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the article titled "Financing Global Common Goods for Health: When the World is a Country," authors Yamey, Jamison, Hanssen, and Soucat address failures in the global health community in identifying and tackling CGHs. 43 Many CGH, especially those related to communicable diseases or environmental drivers, have large global cost externalities related to failure, justifying the argument that external financial support is an important investment. The article both makes the case for re-prioritizing investment in global functions, and then examines current financing flows to global functions and the large estimated financing gap.…”

Section: Finding Our Way Back To Basicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Both Markets and Governments Fail Health

Yazbeck

Soucat

2019

Health Systems & Reform

Self Cite

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