Challenges in international health financing and implications for the new pandemic fund.
Global health financing
Global health governance
Health emergency preparedness
Pandemic Fund
Pandemic preparedness and response
Journal
Globalization and health
ISSN: 1744-8603
Titre abrégé: Global Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101245734
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Dec 2023
05 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
22
08
2023
accepted:
28
11
2023
medline:
7
12
2023
pubmed:
6
12
2023
entrez:
5
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The failures of the international COVID-19 response highlighted key gaps in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The G20 and WHO have called for additional funding of $10.5 billion per year to adequately strengthen the global PPR architecture. In response to these calls, in 2022 the World Bank announced the launch of a new Financial Intermediary Fund (The Pandemic Fund) to catalyse this additional funding. However, there is considerable unclarity regarding the governance makeup and financial modalities of the Pandemic Fund, and divergence of opinion about whether the Fund has been successfully designed to respond to key challenges in global health financing. The article outlines eight challenges associated with global health financing instruments and development aid for health within the global health literature. These include misaligned aid allocation; accountability; multistakeholder representation and participation; country ownership; donor coherency and fragmentation; transparency; power dynamics, and; anti-corruption. Using available information about the Pandemic Fund, the article positions the Pandemic Fund against these challenges to determine in what ways the financing instrument recognizes, addresses, partially addresses, or ignores them. The assessment argues that although the Pandemic Fund has adopted a few measures to recognise and address some of the challenges, overall, the Pandemic Fund has unclear policies in response to most of the challenges while leaving many unaddressed. It remains unclear how the Pandemic Fund is explicitly addressing challenges widely recognized in the global health financing literature. Moreover, there is evidence that the Pandemic Fund might be exacerbating these global financing challenges, thus raising questions about its potential efficacy, suitability, and chances of success. In response, this article offers four sets of policy recommendations for how the Pandemic Fund and the PPR financing architecture might respond more effectively to the identified challenges.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The failures of the international COVID-19 response highlighted key gaps in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The G20 and WHO have called for additional funding of $10.5 billion per year to adequately strengthen the global PPR architecture. In response to these calls, in 2022 the World Bank announced the launch of a new Financial Intermediary Fund (The Pandemic Fund) to catalyse this additional funding. However, there is considerable unclarity regarding the governance makeup and financial modalities of the Pandemic Fund, and divergence of opinion about whether the Fund has been successfully designed to respond to key challenges in global health financing.
METHODS/RESULTS
RESULTS
The article outlines eight challenges associated with global health financing instruments and development aid for health within the global health literature. These include misaligned aid allocation; accountability; multistakeholder representation and participation; country ownership; donor coherency and fragmentation; transparency; power dynamics, and; anti-corruption. Using available information about the Pandemic Fund, the article positions the Pandemic Fund against these challenges to determine in what ways the financing instrument recognizes, addresses, partially addresses, or ignores them. The assessment argues that although the Pandemic Fund has adopted a few measures to recognise and address some of the challenges, overall, the Pandemic Fund has unclear policies in response to most of the challenges while leaving many unaddressed.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
It remains unclear how the Pandemic Fund is explicitly addressing challenges widely recognized in the global health financing literature. Moreover, there is evidence that the Pandemic Fund might be exacerbating these global financing challenges, thus raising questions about its potential efficacy, suitability, and chances of success. In response, this article offers four sets of policy recommendations for how the Pandemic Fund and the PPR financing architecture might respond more effectively to the identified challenges.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38053177
doi: 10.1186/s12992-023-00999-6
pii: 10.1186/s12992-023-00999-6
pmc: PMC10696881
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
97Subventions
Organisme : Economic and Social Research Council
ID : ES/X001482/1
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS Med. 2021 Apr 22;18(4):e1003604
pubmed: 33886540
Health Policy Plan. 2009 Jul;24(4):239-52
pubmed: 19491291
BMJ. 2021 Jan 28;372:n91
pubmed: 33509924
Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci). 2019 Dec;13(5):287-294
pubmed: 31756513
BMJ. 2021 Apr 23;373:n1072
pubmed: 33893123
Health Syst Reform. 2019;5(4):334-349
pubmed: 31860402
Global Health. 2022 May 15;18(1):51
pubmed: 35570269
Global Health. 2013 May 10;9(1):18
pubmed: 23663485
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023;12:7806
pubmed: 37579388
BMJ. 2017 Aug 31;358:j3397
pubmed: 28860109
BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2012 Oct 22;12:23
pubmed: 23088820
Global Health. 2005 Apr 22;1(1):6
pubmed: 15847685
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Sep;5(9):
pubmed: 32978214
Global Health. 2017 Dec 12;13(1):89
pubmed: 29233165
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jan;8(1):
pubmed: 36599499
Global Health. 2010 Mar 02;6:3
pubmed: 20196845
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Oct;8(Suppl 8):
pubmed: 37813446
BMJ. 2017 Aug 31;358:j3395
pubmed: 28860141
J Public Health Policy. 2020 Jun;41(2):196-205
pubmed: 31796865
Lancet. 2022 Jan 29;399(10323):487-494
pubmed: 34902308
Lancet. 2023 Jun 10;401(10392):1964-2012
pubmed: 37224836
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 20;5:ED000157
pubmed: 35593101
BMJ. 2022 Nov 25;379:o2857
pubmed: 36427867
Front Public Health. 2021 Aug 02;9:694705
pubmed: 34409008
Health Econ Policy Law. 2017 Apr;12(2):207-221
pubmed: 28332463
Lancet. 2017 Jul 15;390(10091):324-332
pubmed: 28139255
BMJ. 2017 Aug 31;358:j3394
pubmed: 28860310
Lancet. 2022 Oct 8;400(10359):1224-1280
pubmed: 36115368
Global Health. 2014 Dec 09;10:73
pubmed: 25487705
Lancet. 2008 Sep 27;372(9644):1185-91
pubmed: 18926279
BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Jul 18;16 Suppl 4:212
pubmed: 27454542
Bull World Health Organ. 2018 Sep 1;96(9):634-643
pubmed: 30262945
Glob Public Health. 2021 Oct 22;:1-17
pubmed: 34686103
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Feb;8(2):
pubmed: 36854490
Lancet. 2022 Jul 30;400(10349):345-346
pubmed: 35779554
Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69
pubmed: 20854677
Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2020 Dec;28(2):1795446
pubmed: 32772645
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020 Sep;74(9):681-682
pubmed: 32669357
PLoS One. 2022 Aug 2;17(8):e0269203
pubmed: 35917329
Global Health. 2021 Sep 18;17(1):108
pubmed: 34537059
Health Econ Policy Law. 2017 Apr;12(2):285-296
pubmed: 28332466