Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/economics , Cost of Illness , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , Preventive Health Services/economics , COVID-19 , Humans , Public Health Practice/economics , SARS-CoV-2 , United StatesABSTRACT
There is an unmet need for greater investment in preparedness against major epidemics and pandemics. The arguments in favour of such investment have been largely based on estimates of the losses in national incomes that might occur as the result of a major epidemic or pandemic. Recently, we extended the estimate to include the valuation of the lives lost as a result of pandemic-related increases in mortality. This produced markedly higher estimates of the full value of loss that might occur as the result of a future pandemic. We parametrized an exceedance probability function for a global influenza pandemic and estimated that the expected number of influenza-pandemic-related deaths is about 720 000 per year. We calculated that the expected annual losses from pandemic risk to be about 500 billion United States dollars - or 0.6% of global income - per year. This estimate falls within - but towards the lower end of - the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's estimates of the value of the losses from global warming, which range from 0.2% to 2% of global income. The estimated percentage of annual national income represented by the expected value of losses varied by country income grouping: from a little over 0.3% in high-income countries to 1.6% in lower-middle-income countries. Most of the losses from influenza pandemics come from rare, severe events.
Il est nécessaire d'investir davantage dans la préparation contre les grandes épidémies et les pandémies. Les arguments en faveur de cet investissement s'appuient en grande partie sur les estimations des pertes au niveau du revenu national que pourrait entraîner une grande épidémie ou une pandémie. Récemment, nous avons élargi ces estimations pour y inclure la valeur des pertes faisant suite à des hausses de mortalité dues à des pandémies. Cela a donné des estimations nettement plus élevées de la valeur totale de la perte que pourrait occasionner une future pandémie. Nous avons paramétré une fonction de probabilité de dépassement pour une pandémie mondiale de grippe et avons estimé que le nombre escompté de décès dus à cette pandémie de grippe était d'environ 720 000 par an. Nous avons calculé que les pertes annuelles découlant du risque de pandémie représentaient environ 500 milliards de dollars des États-Unis, soit 0,6% du revenu mondial par an. Cette estimation rejoint (dans la fourchette inférieure) celles du Groupe d'experts intergouvernemental sur l'évolution du climat quant à la valeur des pertes dues au réchauffement de la planète, qui vont de 0,2% à 2% du revenu mondial. Le pourcentage estimé du revenu national annuel représenté par la valeur escomptée des pertes variait selon la catégorie de revenu des pays: d'un peu plus de 0,3% dans les pays à revenu élevé à 1,6% dans les pays à revenu intermédiaire-tranche inférieure. La plupart des pertes découlant de pandémies de grippe sont dues à des événements rares et graves.
Hay una necesidad no satisfecha de invertir más en la preparación para grandes epidemias y pandemias. Los argumentos a favor de dicha inversión se basan, en gran parte, en las estimaciones de las pérdidas en los ingresos nacionales que podrían darse como resultado de una gran epidemia o pandemia. Recientemente, ampliamos el cálculo para incluir la valoración de las vidas perdidas como resultado del aumento de la mortalidad relacionado con la pandemia. Esto dio como resultado unas estimaciones notablemente más altas del valor de la pérdida que podría resultar de una futura pandemia. Hemos parametrizado una función de probabilidad de excedencia para una pandemia de gripe mundial y estimado que el número esperado de muertes causadas por una pandemia de gripe es de aproximadamente 720 000 por año. Calculamos que las pérdidas anuales esperadas del riesgo de pandemia son de unos 500 000 millones de dólares estadounidenses, o el 0,6 % de los ingresos mundiales, por año. Esta estimación se encuentra dentro, pero cerca del mínimo, de las estimaciones del Panel Intergubernamental del Cambio Climático sobre el valor de las pérdidas por el calentamiento global, que oscilan entre el 0,2 % y el 2 % de los ingresos globales. El porcentaje estimado de los ingresos nacionales anuales representado por el valor esperado de las pérdidas varió según la agrupación de ingresos del país: de poco más del 0,3 % en los países con ingresos altos al 1,6 % en los países con ingresos medios o bajos. La mayoría de las pérdidas por pandemias de gripe provienen de casos raros y severos.
Subject(s)
Cost of Illness , Epidemics , Influenza, Human/mortality , Pandemics , Humans , Income , Risk , Sickness Impact ProfileABSTRACT
The Commission on Investing in Health (CIH), an international group of 25 economists and global health experts, published its Global Health 2035 report in The Lancet in December 2013. The report laid out an ambitious investment framework for achieving a "grand convergence" in health-a universal reduction in deaths from infectious diseases and maternal and child health conditions-within a generation. This article captures ten key elements that the CIH found important to its process and successful outcomes. The elements are presented in chronological order, from inception to post-publication activities. The starting point is to identify the gap that a new commission could help to narrow. A critical early step is to choose a chair who can help to set the agenda, motivate the commissioners, frame the commission's analytic work, and run the commission meetings in an effective way. In selecting commissioners, important considerations are their technical expertise, ensuring diversity of people and viewpoints, and the connections that commissioners have with the intended policy audience. Financial and human resources need to be secured, typically from universities, foundations, and development agencies. It is important to set a clear end date, so that the commission's work program, the timing of its meetings and its interim deadlines can be established. In-person meetings are usually a more effective mechanism than conference calls for gaining commissioners' inputs, surfacing important debates, and 'reality testing' the commission's key findings and messages. To have policy impact, the commission report should ideally say something new and unexpected and should have simple messages. Generating new empirical data and including forward-looking recommendations can also help galvanize policy action. Finally, the lifespan of a commission can be extended if it lays the foundation for a research agenda that is then taken up after the commission report is published.
Subject(s)
Global Health/trends , Health Planning Organizations , Health Policy , Health Priorities , Leadership , Developing Countries , Health Plan Implementation , HumansABSTRACT
Prompted by the 20th anniversary of the 1993 World Development Report, a Lancet Commission revisited the case for investment in health and developed a new investment framework to achieve dramatic health gains by 2035. The Commission's report has four key messages, each accompanied by opportunities for action by national governments of low-income and middle-income countries and by the international community. First, there is an enormous economic payoff from investing in health. The impressive returns make a strong case for both increased domestic financing of health and for allocating a higher proportion of official development assistance to development of health. Second, modeling by the Commission found that a "grand convergence" in health is achievable by 2035-that is, a reduction in infectious, maternal, and child mortality down to universally low levels. Convergence would require aggressive scale up of existing and new health tools, and it could mostly be financed from the expected economic growth of low- and middle-income countries. The international community can best support convergence by funding the development and delivery of new health technologies and by curbing antibiotic resistance. Third, fiscal policies -such as taxation of tobacco and alcohol- are a powerful and underused lever that governments can use to curb non-communicable diseases and injuries while also raising revenue for health. International action on NCDs and injuries should focus on providing technical assistance on fiscal policies, regional cooperation on tobacco, and funding policy and implementation research on scaling-up of interventions to tackle these conditions. Fourth, progressive universalism, a pathway to universal health coverage (UHC) that includes the poor from the outset, is an efficient way to achieve health and financial risk protection. For national governments, progressive universalism would yield high health gains per dollar spent and poor people would gain the most in terms of health and financial protection. The international community can best support countries to implement progressive UHC by financing policy and implementation research, such as on the mechanics of designing and implementing evolution of the benefits package as the resource envelope for public finance grows.
Subject(s)
Global Health , Public Health , Community Health Planning , Developing Countries , Financing, Government , Financing, Organized , Goals , Health Policy , Health Promotion , Humans , International Cooperation , Investments , Preventive Health Services , Universal Health InsuranceABSTRACT
Con motivo del 20º aniversario del Informe sobre el Desarrollo Mundial 1993, una Comisión de la revista The Lancet reconsideró el argumento a favor de la inversión en salud y desarrolló un nuevo marco de inversión para lograr mejoras dramáticas en materia de salud para el año 2035. El informe de la Comisión contiene cuatro mensajes clave, cada uno acompañado de oportunidades para los gobiernos nacionales de países de ingresos bajos y medios y para la comunidad internacional. En primer lugar, invertir en salud acarrea enormes rendimientos económicos. Las impresionantes ganancias son un fuerte argumento a favor de un aumento en el financiamiento nacional de la salud y de asignar una mayor proporción de la asistencia oficial al desarrollo de la salud. En segundo lugar, en el modelo creado por la Comisión se encontró que es posible lograr para el año 2035 una "gran convergencia" en salud, consistente en la reducción de las tasas de mortalidad materna, infantil y por infecciones a niveles universalmente bajos. Tal convergencia requeriría la ampliación de las herramientas de salud existentes y un incremento agresivo de nuevas herramientas, y podría ser financiada en su mayor parte con recursos derivados del crecimiento económico esperado de los países de ingresos bajos y medios. La mejor manera en que la comunidad internacional puede apoyar la convergencia es financiando el desarrollo y suministro de nuevas tecnologías de salud, y frenando la resistencia a los antibióticos. En tercer lugar, las políticas fiscales -tales como los impuestos al tabaco y al alcohol- son una palanca poderosa y subutilizada que los gobiernos pueden emplear para detener el avance de las enfermedades no transmisibles (ENT) y las lesiones, a la vez que elevan los ingresos públicos para la salud. La acción internacional sobre las ENT y lesiones debería enfocarse en proporcionar asistencia técnica sobre políticas fiscales, en cooperación regional para el combate al tabaquismo y en financiar investigación sobre políticas e implementación para ampliar las intervenciones que enfrenten estos problemas. En cuarto lugar, la universalización progresiva -una vía hacia la cobertura universal de salud (CUS) que incluya desde el comienzo a los pobres- es una manera eficiente de lograr la protección a la salud contra riesgos financieros. Para los gobiernos nacionales, la universalización progresiva produciría elevadas ganancias en salud por cada dólar que se gaste en ésta, y los pobres serían quienes más ganarían en términos tanto de salud como de protección financiera. La mejor manera en que la comunidad internacional puede brindar apoyo a los países para implementar una CUS progresiva es financiando la investigación sobre políticas e implementación, por ejemplo, sobre la mecánica del diseño e instrumentación de la evolución del paquete de beneficios conforme crezca el presupuesto para las finanzas públicas.
Prompted by the 20th anniversary of the 1993 World Development Report, a Lancet Commission revisited the case for investment in health and developed a new investment framework to achieve dramatic health gains by 2035. The Commission's report has four key messages, each accompanied by opportunities for action by national governments of low-income and middle-income countries and by the international community. First, there is an enormous economic payoff from investing in health. The impressive returns make a strong case for both increased domestic financing of health and for allocating a higher proportion of official development assistance to development of health. Second, modeling by the Commission found that a "grand convergence" in health is achievable by 2035-that is, a reduction in infectious, maternal, and child mortality down to universally low levels. Convergence would require aggressive scale up of existing and new health tools, and it could mostly be financed from the expected economic growth of low- and middle-income countries. The international community can best support convergence by funding the development and delivery of new health technologies and by curbing antibiotic resistance. Third, fiscal policies -such as taxation of tobacco and alcohol- are a powerful and underused lever that governments can use to curb non-communicable diseases and injuries while also raising revenue for health. International action on NCDs and injuries should focus on providing technical assistance on fiscal policies, regional cooperation on tobacco, and funding policy and implementation research on scaling-up of interventions to tackle these conditions. Fourth, progressive universalism, a pathway to universal health coverage (UHC) that includes the poor from the outset, is an efficient way to achieve health and financial risk protection. For national governments, progressive universalism would yield high health gains per dollar spent and poor people would gain the most in terms of health and financial protection. The international community can best support countries to implement progressive UHC by financing policy and implementation research, such as on the mechanics of designing and implementing evolution of the benefits package as the resource envelope for public finance grows.
Subject(s)
Humans , Public Health , Global Health , Preventive Health Services , Community Health Planning , Universal Health Insurance , Developing Countries , Financing, Government , Financing, Organized , Goals , Health Policy , Health Promotion , International Cooperation , InvestmentsABSTRACT
The slow global response to the Ebola crisis in west Africa suggests that important gaps exist in donor financing for key global functions, such as support for health research and development for diseases of poverty and strengthening of outbreak preparedness. In this Health Policy, we use the International Development Statistics databases to quantify donor support for such functions. We classify donor funding for health into aid for global functions (provision of global public goods, management of cross-border externalities, and fostering of leadership and stewardship) versus country-specific aid. We use a new measure of donor funding that combines official development assistance (ODA) for health with additional donor spending on research and development (R&D) for diseases of poverty. Much R&D spending falls outside ODA--ie, the assistance that is conventionally reported through ODA databases of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. This expanded definition, which we term health ODA plus, provides a more comprehensive picture of donor support for health that could reshape how policy makers will approach their support for global health.
