Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?
After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the system is challenged on several fronts: by the economic downturn and stagnation of DAH, by the epidemiological transition and increase in non-communicable diseases, and by the economic transition and rise of the midd...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Health economics, policy and law policy and law, 2017-04, Vol.12 (2), p.223-244 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 244 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 223 |
container_title | Health economics, policy and law |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Ottersen, Trygve Kamath, Aparna Moon, Suerie Martinsen, Lene Røttingen, John-Arne |
description | After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the system is challenged on several fronts: by the economic downturn and stagnation of DAH, by the epidemiological transition and increase in non-communicable diseases, and by the economic transition and rise of the middle-income countries. This raises questions about which countries should receive DAH and how much, and, fundamentally, what criteria that promote fair and effective allocation. Yet, no broad comparative assessment exists of the criteria used today. We reviewed the allocation criteria stated by five multilateral and nine bilateral funders of DAH. We found that several funders had only limited information about concrete criteria publicly available. Moreover, many funders not devoted to health lacked specific criteria for DAH or criteria directly related to health, and no funder had criteria directly related to inequality. National income per capita was emphasised by many funders, but the associated eligibility thresholds varied considerably. These findings and the broad overview of criteria can assist funders in critically examining and revising the criteria they use, and inform the wider debate about what the optimal criteria are. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S1744133116000475 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_crist</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_cristin_nora_10852_62844</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1744133116000475</cupid><sourcerecordid>1880470243</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c506t-4fb722da7b840a6f04c030faac8946ee805f083c11ded9635db86650e13e11dc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkd1rFDEUxUNRurX6B_hiA770ZTR38jFZX4q0fkGhD3XBt-HO5I6bZT62SUbxvze120UsBZ8SDr97cnIPYy9BvAEB1dtrqJQCKQGMEEJV-oAd3UoFSPXtyf4uYcGexbjJiLESDtmitFKWypRHbHVBP6iftgONiWOMPiYcW-LdFPiasE_rd_znGhNvg08UPHI38WHuky84jo43vsesY8-7eXQUIp8jnT1nTzvsI73Yncds9fHD1_PPxeXVpy_n7y-LVguTCtU1VVk6rBqrBJpOqFZI0SG2dqkMkRW6E1a2AI7c0kjtGmuMFgSSstbKY3Zy55vTxeTHepwC1iCsLmtTWqUycXpHbMN0M1NM9eBjS32PI01zrMEuIe9QW_MfqM07FqWSGX39D7qZ5jDmr_6hpK4qvcwU3KebYgzU1dvgBwy_csL6tsD6QYF55tXOeW4GcvuJ-8YyIHemODTBu-_019uP2v4GxOmhzQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1880357759</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Ottersen, Trygve ; Kamath, Aparna ; Moon, Suerie ; Martinsen, Lene ; Røttingen, John-Arne</creator><creatorcontrib>Ottersen, Trygve ; Kamath, Aparna ; Moon, Suerie ; Martinsen, Lene ; Røttingen, John-Arne</creatorcontrib><description>After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the system is challenged on several fronts: by the economic downturn and stagnation of DAH, by the epidemiological transition and increase in non-communicable diseases, and by the economic transition and rise of the middle-income countries. This raises questions about which countries should receive DAH and how much, and, fundamentally, what criteria that promote fair and effective allocation. Yet, no broad comparative assessment exists of the criteria used today. We reviewed the allocation criteria stated by five multilateral and nine bilateral funders of DAH. We found that several funders had only limited information about concrete criteria publicly available. Moreover, many funders not devoted to health lacked specific criteria for DAH or criteria directly related to health, and no funder had criteria directly related to inequality. National income per capita was emphasised by many funders, but the associated eligibility thresholds varied considerably. These findings and the broad overview of criteria can assist funders in critically examining and revising the criteria they use, and inform the wider debate about what the optimal criteria are.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1744-1331</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-134X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1744133116000475</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28332462</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Economics ; External financing ; Financing, Organized ; Foreign aid ; GDP ; Global Health ; Gross Domestic Product ; Health care policy ; Health economics ; Health Expenditures ; Humans ; International Cooperation ; Low income groups ; Resource Allocation</subject><ispartof>Health economics, policy and law, 2017-04, Vol.12 (2), p.223-244</ispartof><rights>Cambridge University Press 2017</rights><rights>Cambridge University Press 2017 This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</rights><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c506t-4fb722da7b840a6f04c030faac8946ee805f083c11ded9635db86650e13e11dc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c506t-4fb722da7b840a6f04c030faac8946ee805f083c11ded9635db86650e13e11dc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744133116000475/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,230,314,778,782,883,26554,27853,27911,27912,55615</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332462$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ottersen, Trygve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kamath, Aparna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moon, Suerie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martinsen, Lene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Røttingen, John-Arne</creatorcontrib><title>Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?</title><title>Health economics, policy and law</title><addtitle>HEPL</addtitle><description>After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the system is challenged on several fronts: by the economic downturn and stagnation of DAH, by the epidemiological transition and increase in non-communicable diseases, and by the economic transition and rise of the middle-income countries. This raises questions about which countries should receive DAH and how much, and, fundamentally, what criteria that promote fair and effective allocation. Yet, no broad comparative assessment exists of the criteria used today. We reviewed the allocation criteria stated by five multilateral and nine bilateral funders of DAH. We found that several funders had only limited information about concrete criteria publicly available. Moreover, many funders not devoted to health lacked specific criteria for DAH or criteria directly related to health, and no funder had criteria directly related to inequality. National income per capita was emphasised by many funders, but the associated eligibility thresholds varied considerably. These findings and the broad overview of criteria can assist funders in critically examining and revising the criteria they use, and inform the wider debate about what the optimal criteria are.</description><subject>Economics</subject><subject>External financing</subject><subject>Financing, Organized</subject><subject>Foreign aid</subject><subject>GDP</subject><subject>Global Health</subject><subject>Gross Domestic Product</subject><subject>Health care policy</subject><subject>Health economics</subject><subject>Health Expenditures</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>International Cooperation</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Resource Allocation</subject><issn>1744-1331</issn><issn>1744-134X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>IKXGN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>3HK</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkd1rFDEUxUNRurX6B_hiA770ZTR38jFZX4q0fkGhD3XBt-HO5I6bZT62SUbxvze120UsBZ8SDr97cnIPYy9BvAEB1dtrqJQCKQGMEEJV-oAd3UoFSPXtyf4uYcGexbjJiLESDtmitFKWypRHbHVBP6iftgONiWOMPiYcW-LdFPiasE_rd_znGhNvg08UPHI38WHuky84jo43vsesY8-7eXQUIp8jnT1nTzvsI73Yncds9fHD1_PPxeXVpy_n7y-LVguTCtU1VVk6rBqrBJpOqFZI0SG2dqkMkRW6E1a2AI7c0kjtGmuMFgSSstbKY3Zy55vTxeTHepwC1iCsLmtTWqUycXpHbMN0M1NM9eBjS32PI01zrMEuIe9QW_MfqM07FqWSGX39D7qZ5jDmr_6hpK4qvcwU3KebYgzU1dvgBwy_csL6tsD6QYF55tXOeW4GcvuJ-8YyIHemODTBu-_019uP2v4GxOmhzQ</recordid><startdate>20170401</startdate><enddate>20170401</enddate><creator>Ottersen, Trygve</creator><creator>Kamath, Aparna</creator><creator>Moon, Suerie</creator><creator>Martinsen, Lene</creator><creator>Røttingen, John-Arne</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>IKXGN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>3HK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170401</creationdate><title>Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?</title><author>Ottersen, Trygve ; Kamath, Aparna ; Moon, Suerie ; Martinsen, Lene ; Røttingen, John-Arne</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c506t-4fb722da7b840a6f04c030faac8946ee805f083c11ded9635db86650e13e11dc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Economics</topic><topic>External financing</topic><topic>Financing, Organized</topic><topic>Foreign aid</topic><topic>GDP</topic><topic>Global Health</topic><topic>Gross Domestic Product</topic><topic>Health care policy</topic><topic>Health economics</topic><topic>Health Expenditures</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>International Cooperation</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Resource Allocation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ottersen, Trygve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kamath, Aparna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moon, Suerie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martinsen, Lene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Røttingen, John-Arne</creatorcontrib><collection>Cambridge Journals Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</collection><jtitle>Health economics, policy and law</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ottersen, Trygve</au><au>Kamath, Aparna</au><au>Moon, Suerie</au><au>Martinsen, Lene</au><au>Røttingen, John-Arne</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?</atitle><jtitle>Health economics, policy and law</jtitle><addtitle>HEPL</addtitle><date>2017-04-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>223</spage><epage>244</epage><pages>223-244</pages><issn>1744-1331</issn><eissn>1744-134X</eissn><abstract>After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the system is challenged on several fronts: by the economic downturn and stagnation of DAH, by the epidemiological transition and increase in non-communicable diseases, and by the economic transition and rise of the middle-income countries. This raises questions about which countries should receive DAH and how much, and, fundamentally, what criteria that promote fair and effective allocation. Yet, no broad comparative assessment exists of the criteria used today. We reviewed the allocation criteria stated by five multilateral and nine bilateral funders of DAH. We found that several funders had only limited information about concrete criteria publicly available. Moreover, many funders not devoted to health lacked specific criteria for DAH or criteria directly related to health, and no funder had criteria directly related to inequality. National income per capita was emphasised by many funders, but the associated eligibility thresholds varied considerably. These findings and the broad overview of criteria can assist funders in critically examining and revising the criteria they use, and inform the wider debate about what the optimal criteria are.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>28332462</pmid><doi>10.1017/S1744133116000475</doi><tpages>22</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1744-1331 |
ispartof | Health economics, policy and law, 2017-04, Vol.12 (2), p.223-244 |
issn | 1744-1331 1744-134X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_cristin_nora_10852_62844 |
source | MEDLINE; NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives; PAIS Index; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Economics External financing Financing, Organized Foreign aid GDP Global Health Gross Domestic Product Health care policy Health economics Health Expenditures Humans International Cooperation Low income groups Resource Allocation |
title | Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T00%3A50%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_crist&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20assistance%20for%20health:%20what%20criteria%20do%20multi-%20and%20bilateral%20funders%20use?&rft.jtitle=Health%20economics,%20policy%20and%20law&rft.au=Ottersen,%20Trygve&rft.date=2017-04-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=223&rft.epage=244&rft.pages=223-244&rft.issn=1744-1331&rft.eissn=1744-134X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1744133116000475&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_crist%3E1880470243%3C/proquest_crist%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1880357759&rft_id=info:pmid/28332462&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1744133116000475&rfr_iscdi=true |