每年筹集 310 亿美元用于防范和应对大流行病的可行性有多大?经济增长模型分析。

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Globalization and Health Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1186/s12992-024-01058-4
Minahil Shahid, Marco Schäferhoff, Garrett Brown, Gavin Yamey
{"title":"每年筹集 310 亿美元用于防范和应对大流行病的可行性有多大?经济增长模型分析。","authors":"Minahil Shahid, Marco Schäferhoff, Garrett Brown, Gavin Yamey","doi":"10.1186/s12992-024-01058-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Covid-19 has reinforced health and economic cases for investing in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The World Bank and World Health Organization (WHO) propose that low- and middle-income governments and donor countries should invest $31.1 billion each year for PPR. We analyse, based on the projected economic growth of countries between 2022 and 2027, how likely it is that low- and middle-income country governments and donors can mobilize the estimated funding.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We modelled trends in economic growth to project domestic health spending by low- and middle-income governments and official development assistance (ODA) by donors for years 2022 to 2027. We modelled two scenarios for countries and donors - a constant and an optimistic scenario. Under the constant scenario we assume that countries and donors continue to dedicate the same proportion of their health spending and ODA as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national income (GNI), respectively, as they did during baseline (the latest year for which data are available). In the optimistic scenario, we assume a yearly increase of 2.5% in health spending as a share of GDP for countries and ODA as a share of GNI for donors.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our analysis shows that low-income countries would need to invest on average 37%, lower-middle income countries 9%, and upper-middle income countries 1%, of their total health spending on PPR each year under the constant scenario to meet the World Bank WHO targets. Donors would need to allocate on average 8% of their total ODA across all sectors to PPR each year to meet their target.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The World Bank WHO targets for PPR will not be met unless low- and middle-income governments and donors spend a much higher share of their funding on PPR. Even under optimistic growth scenarios, low-income and lower-middle income countries will require increased support from global health donors. The donor target cannot be met using the yearly increase in ODA under any scenario. If the country and donor targets are not met, the highest-impact health security measures need to be prioritized for funding. Alternative sources of PPR financing could include global taxation (e.g., on financial transactions, carbon, or airline flights), cancelling debt, and addressing illicit financial flows. There is also a need for continued work on estimating current PPR costs and funding requirements in order to arrive at more enduring and reliable estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":12747,"journal":{"name":"Globalization and Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264850/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How feasible is it to mobilize $31 billion a year for pandemic preparedness and response? An economic growth modelling analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Minahil Shahid, Marco Schäferhoff, Garrett Brown, Gavin Yamey\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12992-024-01058-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Covid-19 has reinforced health and economic cases for investing in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The World Bank and World Health Organization (WHO) propose that low- and middle-income governments and donor countries should invest $31.1 billion each year for PPR. We analyse, based on the projected economic growth of countries between 2022 and 2027, how likely it is that low- and middle-income country governments and donors can mobilize the estimated funding.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We modelled trends in economic growth to project domestic health spending by low- and middle-income governments and official development assistance (ODA) by donors for years 2022 to 2027. We modelled two scenarios for countries and donors - a constant and an optimistic scenario. Under the constant scenario we assume that countries and donors continue to dedicate the same proportion of their health spending and ODA as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national income (GNI), respectively, as they did during baseline (the latest year for which data are available). In the optimistic scenario, we assume a yearly increase of 2.5% in health spending as a share of GDP for countries and ODA as a share of GNI for donors.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our analysis shows that low-income countries would need to invest on average 37%, lower-middle income countries 9%, and upper-middle income countries 1%, of their total health spending on PPR each year under the constant scenario to meet the World Bank WHO targets. Donors would need to allocate on average 8% of their total ODA across all sectors to PPR each year to meet their target.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The World Bank WHO targets for PPR will not be met unless low- and middle-income governments and donors spend a much higher share of their funding on PPR. Even under optimistic growth scenarios, low-income and lower-middle income countries will require increased support from global health donors. The donor target cannot be met using the yearly increase in ODA under any scenario. If the country and donor targets are not met, the highest-impact health security measures need to be prioritized for funding. Alternative sources of PPR financing could include global taxation (e.g., on financial transactions, carbon, or airline flights), cancelling debt, and addressing illicit financial flows. There is also a need for continued work on estimating current PPR costs and funding requirements in order to arrive at more enduring and reliable estimates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Globalization and Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264850/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Globalization and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-024-01058-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Globalization and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-024-01058-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:Covid-19 强化了投资大流行病防备和应对(PPR)的健康和经济理由。世界银行和世界卫生组织(WHO)建议,中低收入国家政府和捐助国每年应投资 311 亿美元用于大流行病防备和应对。我们根据 2022 年至 2027 年期间各国的经济增长预测,分析了中低收入国家政府和捐赠国能够筹集到预计资金的可能性有多大:我们模拟了经济增长趋势,以预测 2022 年至 2027 年中低收入国家政府的国内医疗支出和捐赠国的官方发展援助(ODA)。我们为国家和捐助方模拟了两种情景--不变情景和乐观情景。在恒定情景下,我们假定各国和捐助方继续将其卫生支出和官方发展援助分别占国内生产总值(GDP)和国民总收入(GNI)的比例保持在基线(有数据可查的最近一年)期间的水平。在乐观情况下,我们假设各国的医疗支出占国内生产总值的比例每年增长 2.5%,捐助国的官方发展援助占国民总收入的比例每年增长 2.5%:我们的分析表明,要达到世界银行世卫组织的目标,在不变情景下,低收入国家平均每年需要将其卫生总支出的 37%、中低收入国家的 9%、中高收入国家的 1%投入到预防性公共卫生服务中。捐助方平均每年需要将其所有部门官方发展援助总额的 8%用于预防危机和复原,以实现其目标:除非中低收入国家政府和捐助者将更多的资金用于公共预防和公共卫生,否则世界银行世卫组织的公共预防和公共卫生目标将无法实现。即使在乐观的增长情况下,低收入和中低收入国家也需要全球卫生捐助者提供更多支持。在任何情况下,都无法通过官方发展援助的逐年增长来实现捐助目标。如果国家和捐助方的目标无法实现,就需要优先资助影响最大的卫生安全措施。预防危机和复原方案的其他资金来源可包括全球征税(如对金融交易、碳或航空飞行征税)、取消债务以及解决非法资金流动问题。此外,还需要继续努力估算当前预防危机和复原的成本和资金需求,以便得出更持久、更可靠的估算结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How feasible is it to mobilize $31 billion a year for pandemic preparedness and response? An economic growth modelling analysis.

Background: Covid-19 has reinforced health and economic cases for investing in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The World Bank and World Health Organization (WHO) propose that low- and middle-income governments and donor countries should invest $31.1 billion each year for PPR. We analyse, based on the projected economic growth of countries between 2022 and 2027, how likely it is that low- and middle-income country governments and donors can mobilize the estimated funding.

Methods: We modelled trends in economic growth to project domestic health spending by low- and middle-income governments and official development assistance (ODA) by donors for years 2022 to 2027. We modelled two scenarios for countries and donors - a constant and an optimistic scenario. Under the constant scenario we assume that countries and donors continue to dedicate the same proportion of their health spending and ODA as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national income (GNI), respectively, as they did during baseline (the latest year for which data are available). In the optimistic scenario, we assume a yearly increase of 2.5% in health spending as a share of GDP for countries and ODA as a share of GNI for donors.

Findings: Our analysis shows that low-income countries would need to invest on average 37%, lower-middle income countries 9%, and upper-middle income countries 1%, of their total health spending on PPR each year under the constant scenario to meet the World Bank WHO targets. Donors would need to allocate on average 8% of their total ODA across all sectors to PPR each year to meet their target.

Conclusions: The World Bank WHO targets for PPR will not be met unless low- and middle-income governments and donors spend a much higher share of their funding on PPR. Even under optimistic growth scenarios, low-income and lower-middle income countries will require increased support from global health donors. The donor target cannot be met using the yearly increase in ODA under any scenario. If the country and donor targets are not met, the highest-impact health security measures need to be prioritized for funding. Alternative sources of PPR financing could include global taxation (e.g., on financial transactions, carbon, or airline flights), cancelling debt, and addressing illicit financial flows. There is also a need for continued work on estimating current PPR costs and funding requirements in order to arrive at more enduring and reliable estimates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Globalization and Health
Globalization and Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
18.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: "Globalization and Health" is a pioneering transdisciplinary journal dedicated to situating public health and well-being within the dynamic forces of global development. The journal is committed to publishing high-quality, original research that explores the impact of globalization processes on global public health. This includes examining how globalization influences health systems and the social, economic, commercial, and political determinants of health. The journal welcomes contributions from various disciplines, including policy, health systems, political economy, international relations, and community perspectives. While single-country studies are accepted, they must emphasize global/globalization mechanisms and their relevance to global-level policy discourse and decision-making.
期刊最新文献
The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive analysis. Capturing sources of health system legitimacy in fragmented conflict zones under different governance models: a case study of northwest Syria. Protecting whose welfare? A document analysis of competition regulatory decisions in four jurisdictions across three harmful consumer product industries. Assessing the health status of migrants upon arrival in Europe: a systematic review of the adverse impact of migration journeys. How can advocates leverage power to advance comprehensive regulation on ultra-processed foods? learning from advocate experience in Argentina
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1