Panel 2.4: funding policies and practices

This is a summary of the presentations and discussion of Funding Policies and Practices of the Conference, Health Aspects of the Tsunami Disaster in Asia, convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) in Phuket, Thailand, 04-06 May 2005. The topics discussed included issues related to funding policies and practices as pertain to the responses to the damage created by the Tsunami. It is presented in the following major sections: (1) issues from the perspectives of (a) donors, and (b) recipients; (2) coordination; (3) conclusions; (4) the size of the response; (5) measuring the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) as a financial instrument; (6) other issues; (7) lessons learned; and (8) recommendations. Topics discussed in the other issues section include: (1) data; (2) sustainability; (3) capacity building; (4) unspecified funding; and (5) links to aid for development. Subsections of the lessons learned session include: (1) examining the WHO from the donor perspective; and (2) donor community practices.

The World Health Organization and the transition from "international" to "global" public health

The term "global health" is rapidly replacing the older terminology of "international health." We describe the role of the World Health Organization (WHO) in both international and global health and in the transition from one to the other. We suggest that the term "global health" emerged as part of larger political and historical processes, in which WHO found its dominant role challenged and began to reposition itself within a shifting set of power alliances. Between 1948 and 1998, WHO moved from being the unquestioned leader of international health to being an organization in crisis, facing budget shortfalls and diminished status, especially given the growing influence of new and powerful players. We argue that WHO began to refashion itself as the coordinator, strategic planner, and leader of global health initiatives as a strategy of survival in response to this transformed international political context.

Global health goals: lessons from the worldwide effort to eradicate poliomyelitis

The Global Polio Eradication Initiative was launched in 1988. Assessment of the politics, production, financing, and economics of this international effort has suggested six lessons that might be pertinent to the pursuit of other global health goals. First, such goals should be based on technically sound strategies with proven operational feasibility in a large geographical area. Second, before launching an initiative, an informed collective decision must be negotiated and agreed in an appropriate international forum to keep to a minimum long-term risks in financing and implementation. Third, if substantial community engagement is envisaged, efficient deployment of sufficient resources at that level necessitates a defined, time-limited input by the community within a properly managed partnership. Fourth, although the so-called fair-share concept is arguably the best way to finance such goals, its limitations must be recognised early and alternative strategies developed for settings where it does not work. Fifth, international health goals must be designed and pursued within existing health systems if they are to secure and sustain broad support. Finally, countries, regions, or populations most likely to delay the achievement of a global health goal should be identified at the outset to ensure provision of sufficient resources and attention. The greatest threats to poliomyelitis eradication are a financing gap of US 210 million dollars and difficulties in strategy implementation in at most five countries.

Roll back malaria? The scarcity of international aid for malaria control

The WHO announced the Roll Back Malaria (RBM) movement in 1998, with the goal of halving malaria deaths by 2010, and halving again by 2015. It is widely agreed that reaching this goal requires a major increase in international aid funding for malaria control, to a budget of perhaps 1.5 - 2.5 billion dollars annually. To ascertain whether progress is being made, we compiled data self-reported by the donors to the Development Assistance Committee of OECD, and also to ourselves directly. We find that, in fact, the total amount of international aid dedicated to malaria control, from the 23 richest donor countries plus the World Bank, remains in the range of 100 million dollars annually - a figure that is virtually unchanged since the start of RBM. This lack of progress toward increasing funding very seriously threatens RBM and demands that WHO regularly audit and report on malaria control funding, with the certainty that RBM will fail to meet its deadline of 2010 if this is not done.

Whither the World Health Organization?

The outgoing Director-General of the World Health Organization, Gro Harlem Brundtland, has successfully returned health issues to the international arena. The new Director-General will have to cope with reduced control over funding, debate over WHO's mandate, and the relationships between WHO and other organisations. Despite the broad role described in WHO's constitution, many groups see WHO's mandate as narrowly directed at disease eradication. The method of choice for funding health programs has become public-private partnerships. These have the advantages of bringing private money, management expertise and research knowledge to bear on health problems, but rarely consider the health system as a whole, focusing instead on specific diseases. This has the potential to distort resource allocation and priorities. The international community needs to work to strengthen WHO and maintain its broad mandate to achieve the highest possible level of health for all people.