International Funding for Global Common Goods for Health: An Analysis Using the Creditor Reporting System and G-FINDER Databases. Issue 4 (2nd October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schäferhoff, Marco; Chodavadia, Parth; Martinez, Sebastian; McDade, Kaci Kennedy; Fewer, Sara; Silva, Sachin; Jamison, Dean; Yamey, Gavin
• Is Part Of: Health systems and reform. Volume 5:Issue 4(2019)
• Page Start: 350
• Page End: 365
• Publication Date: 2019-10-02
• Subjects: global common goods for health -- global health funding; Health care reform -- Periodicals; 362.1042
• DOI: 10.1080/23288604.2019.1663646
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2328-8604

Abstract

Abstract: 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.