![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](http://www.eurekalert.org/images/back2e.gif){kind=small}
Public release date: 25-Sep-2012[ | E-mail |
Share ] Contact: Sumrina Yousufzai
syousufzai@plos.org
415-568-3164
Public Library of Science
Press release from PLOS Medicine
The current practice of large donors is forcing the World Health Organization and the World Bank to reflect on how to reform to remain more appealing to the wider set of stakeholders and interests at play, according to Devi Sridhar from the University of Oxford writing in this week's PLOS Medicine.
Sridhar argues that since the priorities of funding bodies largely dictate what health issues and diseases are studied, a major challenge in the governance of global health research funding is agenda-setting, which in turn is a consequence of a larger phenomenon"multi-bi financing."
This term refers to the practice of donors choosing to route fundingearmarked for specific sectors, themes, countries, or regionsthrough multilateral agencies such as the World Health Organization and the World Bank and to the emergence of new multistakeholder initiatives such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and the GAVI Alliance.
Sridhar says: "These new multistakeholder initiatives have five distinct characteristics: a wider set of stakeholders that include non-state institutions, narrower problem-based mandates, financing based on voluntary contributions, no country presence, and legitimacy based on effectiveness, not process."
Sridhar argues that the risk of multi-bi financing is that difficult choices about priority-setting in health will be made in the marketplace of global initiatives, rather than in the community that will have to live with those choices.
She says: "The shift to multi-bi financing likely reflects a desire by participating governments, and others, to control international agencies more tightly."
However, Sridhar adds: "one major impact of multi-bi financing has been to shine a clear light on how and where multilateral institutions, such as the World Bank and the World Health Organization, might do better."
###
Funding: No specific funding was received for this writing this article.
Competing Interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.
Citation: Sridhar D (2012) Who Sets the Global Health Research Agenda? The Challenge of Multi-Bi Financing. PLoS Med 9(9): e1001312. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001312
IN YOUR COVERAGE PLEASE USE THIS URL TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE FREELY AVAILABLE PAPER (THIS LINK WILL BECOME LIVE WHEN THE EMBARGO LIFTS):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001312
CONTACT:
Devi Sridhar
University of Oxford
Oxford, United Kingdom
devi.sridhar@wolfson.ox.ac.uk
[ | E-mail | Share ] ?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Public release date: 25-Sep-2012[ | E-mail |
Share ] Contact: Sumrina Yousufzai
syousufzai@plos.org
415-568-3164
Public Library of Science
Press release from PLOS Medicine
The current practice of large donors is forcing the World Health Organization and the World Bank to reflect on how to reform to remain more appealing to the wider set of stakeholders and interests at play, according to Devi Sridhar from the University of Oxford writing in this week's PLOS Medicine.
Sridhar argues that since the priorities of funding bodies largely dictate what health issues and diseases are studied, a major challenge in the governance of global health research funding is agenda-setting, which in turn is a consequence of a larger phenomenon"multi-bi financing."
This term refers to the practice of donors choosing to route fundingearmarked for specific sectors, themes, countries, or regionsthrough multilateral agencies such as the World Health Organization and the World Bank and to the emergence of new multistakeholder initiatives such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and the GAVI Alliance.
Sridhar says: "These new multistakeholder initiatives have five distinct characteristics: a wider set of stakeholders that include non-state institutions, narrower problem-based mandates, financing based on voluntary contributions, no country presence, and legitimacy based on effectiveness, not process."
Sridhar argues that the risk of multi-bi financing is that difficult choices about priority-setting in health will be made in the marketplace of global initiatives, rather than in the community that will have to live with those choices.
She says: "The shift to multi-bi financing likely reflects a desire by participating governments, and others, to control international agencies more tightly."
However, Sridhar adds: "one major impact of multi-bi financing has been to shine a clear light on how and where multilateral institutions, such as the World Bank and the World Health Organization, might do better."
###
Funding: No specific funding was received for this writing this article.
Competing Interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.
Citation: Sridhar D (2012) Who Sets the Global Health Research Agenda? The Challenge of Multi-Bi Financing. PLoS Med 9(9): e1001312. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001312
IN YOUR COVERAGE PLEASE USE THIS URL TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE FREELY AVAILABLE PAPER (THIS LINK WILL BECOME LIVE WHEN THE EMBARGO LIFTS):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001312
CONTACT:
Devi Sridhar
University of Oxford
Oxford, United Kingdom
devi.sridhar@wolfson.ox.ac.uk
[ | E-mail | Share ] ?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Source: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-09/plos-lda091912.php
peeps nhl playoffs masters 2012 masters the borgias shroud of turin warren sapp
No comments:
Post a Comment