Interrogating the World Bank's role in global health knowledge production, governance, and finance.

BACKGROUND: In the nearly half century since it began lending for population projects, the World Bank has become one of the largest financiers of global health projects and programs, a powerful voice in shaping health agendas in global governance spaces, and a mass producer of evidentiary knowledge for its preferred global health interventions. How can social scientists interrogate the role of the World Bank in shaping 'global health' in the current era? MAIN BODY: As a group of historians, social scientists, and public health officials with experience studying the effects of the institution's investment in health, we identify three challenges to this research. First, a future research agenda requires recognizing that the Bank is not a monolith, but rather has distinct inter-organizational groups that have shaped investment and discourse in complicated, and sometimes contradictory, ways. Second, we must consider how its influence on health policy and investment has changed significantly over time. Third, we must analyze its modes of engagement with other institutions within the global health landscape, and with the private sector. The unique relationships between Bank entities and countries that shape health policy, and the Bank's position as a center of research, permit it to have a formative influence on health economics as applied to international development. Addressing these challenges, we propose a future research agenda for the Bank's influence on global health through three overlapping objects of and domains for study: knowledge-based (shaping health policy knowledge), governance-based (shaping health governance), and finance-based (shaping health financing). We provide a review of case studies in each of these categories to inform this research agenda. CONCLUSIONS: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage, and as state and non-state actors work to build more inclusive and robust health systems around the world, it is more important than ever to consider how to best document and analyze the impacts of Bank's financial and technical investments in the Global South.

The response to flexibility: country intervention choices in the first four rounds of the GAVI Health Systems Strengthening applications.

Since December 2005 the GAVI Alliance (GAVI) Health Systems Strengthening (HSS) window has offered predictable funding to developing countries, based on a combined population and economic formula. This is intended to assist them to address system constraints to improved immunization coverage and health care delivery, needed to meet the Millennium Development Goals. The application process invites countries to prioritize specific system constraints not adequately addressed by other donors, and allows them to allocate their eligible funds accordingly. This article presents an analysis of the first four rounds of countries' funding applications. These requested funding for a variety of health system initiatives that reflected country-specific requirements, and were not limited to improving immunization coverage. Analyses identified a dominance of operational-level health service provision activities, and an absence of interventions related to demand and financing. While the proposed activities are only now being implemented, the results of this study provide evidence that the open application process employed by the HSS window has led to a shift in analysis and planning-from the programmatic to the systemic-in the countries whose applications have been approved. However, the proposed responses to identified constraints are dominated by short-term operational responses, rather than more complex, longer term approaches to health system strengthening.

Understanding the impact of eliminating user fees: utilization and catastrophic health expenditures in Uganda.

There is currently considerable discussion between governments, international agencies, bilateral donors and advocacy groups on whether user fees levied at government health facilities in poor countries should be abolished. It is claimed that this would lead to greater access for the poor and reduce the risks of catastrophic health expenditures if all other factors remained constant, though other factors rarely remain constant in practice. Accordingly, it is important to understand what has actually happened when user fees have been abolished, and why. All fees at first level government health facilities in Uganda were removed in March 2001. This study explores the impact on health service utilization and catastrophic health expenditures using data from National Household Surveys undertaken in 1997, 2000 and 2003. Utilization increased for the non-poor, but at a lower rate than it had in the period immediately before fees were abolished. Utilization among the poor increased much more rapidly after the abolition of fees than beforehand. Unexpectedly, the incidence of catastrophic health expenditure among the poor did not fall. The most likely explanation is that frequent unavailability of drugs at government facilities after 2001 forced patients to purchase from private pharmacies. Informal payments to health workers may also have increased to offset the lost revenue from fees. Countries thinking of removing user charges should first examine what types of activities and inputs at the facility level are funded from the revenue collected by fees, and then develop mechanisms to ensure that these activities can be sustained subsequently.