Back in November, I blogged about what the G20 might mean for health, and argued that drawing any substantive conclusions back then was premature. The issue of the G20 in health was taken up in a big way by the new Global Health Security Centre at Chatham House which organized a one day conference on ‘What’s next for the G20? Investing in health and development’.
For those who were not able to attend I thought it would be useful to highlight the issues that were debated.
In the debate about how to develop a long-term sustainable response to HIV/AIDS in Africa, the behaviour of donors has to be taken into account. So too does the difficult question of who should decide and be responsible for how public funding is allocated within a country.
Is the G20 a short-term crisis arrangement focused narrowly on economic issues? Or does the increased prominence of the G20 indicate significant change in global governance beyond the crisis and beyond finance?
The World Health Organization and its director-general received high praise for the handling of the H1N1, or ‘swine flu’ pandemic. The pandemic has spread to 39 countries and nearly 8500 persons, and appears to be no more lethal than a normal seasonal flu. Despite the positive press for WHO and health agencies throughout the world, this H1N1 outbreak reveals fundamental shortcomings in our preparedness for a major, and more lethal, pandemic.
With the exception of information-sharing, WHO’s performance has been far from stellar. WHO has not been able to limit unilateral measures lacking a scientific basis, nor has it demonstrated the functioning infrastructure to redistribute medicines and vaccines to curb an epidemic. Today’s H1N1 pandemic shows that once a pandemic is active, WHO’s ability to facilitate international cooperation is constrained. International agreement is needed not only to report cases, but to coordinate policies based on scientific knowledge, and to make supplies available where they are needed.
The G20 meeting in London will bring together leaders focusing on the global economic crisis. The financial crisis could contribute to a health crisis poor countries. The G20 can take actions to avert a health crisis. We spell these actions out in a policy brief available here.
Will action on research for health be driven by efficiency or equity? Will research be fast or fair? This week in Bamako, Ministers and their representatives from 59 countries chose equity over efficiency.
GEG Senior Researcher Devi Sridhar and Research Associate Rajaie Batniji have published a study in the Lancet examining the financing of global health.
