IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/hecopl/v12y2017i02p245-263_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Distributing development assistance for health: simulating the implications of 11 criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Ottersen, Trygve
  • Moon, Suerie
  • Røttingen, John-Arne

Abstract

After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the DAH 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. Central to any potent response is a fair and effective allocation of DAH across countries. A myriad of criteria has been proposed or is currently used, but there have been no comprehensive assessment of their distributional implications. We simulated the implications of 11 quantitative allocation criteria across countries and country categories. We found that the distributions varied profoundly. The group of low-income countries received most DAH from needs-based criteria linked to domestic capacity, while the group of upper-middle-income countries was most favoured by an income-inequality criterion. Compared to a baseline distribution guided by gross national income per capita, low-income countries received less DAH by almost all criteria. The findings can inform funders when examining and revising the criteria they use, and provide input to the broader debate about what criteria should be used.

Suggested Citation

  • Ottersen, Trygve & Moon, Suerie & Røttingen, John-Arne, 2017. "Distributing development assistance for health: simulating the implications of 11 criteria," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 245-263, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:12:y:2017:i:02:p:245-263_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744133116000487/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Josephine Borghi & Garrett W. Brown, 2022. "Taking Systems Thinking to the Global Level: Using the WHO Building Blocks to Describe and Appraise the Global Health System in Relation to COVID‐19," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(2), pages 193-207, May.
    2. Iemmi, Valentina, 2021. "Global collective action in mental health financing: Allocation of development assistance for mental health in 142 countries, 2000–2015," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:12:y:2017:i:02:p:245-263_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.