1 / 10

Donor Trends in International Health

Donor Trends in International Health. Why invest in health? What has been the record in general and particularly in the case of IPPF? What are the priorities over the next 10 years. ODA to Development as % of GNI. * UN General Assembly Resolution /October 1970: 0.7% of GNI to ODA.

hestia
Download Presentation

Donor Trends in International Health

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Donor Trends in International Health • Why invest in health? • What has been the record in general and particularly in the case of IPPF? • What are the priorities over the next 10 years

  2. ODA to Development as % of GNI • * UN General Assembly Resolution /October 1970: 0.7% of GNI to ODA. • Only 4 major donors have reached this % in 2003: • - Norway: 0.92% • - Denmark: 0.84%. But, 1.06% in 2000. • - The Netherlands: 0.81% (0.87 on eve of Cairo) • - Sweden: 0.70%. But, 1.00% in 2006 • - By comparison, USA: 0.14%

  3. ODA per US$ billion: Comparison Europe, US and Japan. • - General decrease after Cairo and recovery from 2002 and historical high in 2003 • - Increase in Europe and US and decrease in Japan. • 1991-92 2002 2003 • Europe: 32.2 32.6 40.2 • USA: 11.5 13.9 15.8 • Japan: 11.0 9.3 8.11 • Others: 3.7 3.2 3.6 • Total: 58.4 58.3 68.6

  4. ODA to Health • Promises made in Cairo not kept. • Donors are spending less than US$2 billion instead of 5 billion as per Cairo projections. • Major increase of ODA to health in UK, US. But stagnation in Europe and Japan. • 1990-92 2001-02 • UK 9% 29% • US 5% 24% • Denmark 9% 9% • Japan 2% 2%

  5. ODA to Population and RH • OECD components of Health: • 1990-98 99-02 • * General health: 36% 26% • * Basic health: 30% 35% • * Population: 34% 39% • Increase in population and basis health sectors and decrease in general health.

  6. ODA to Family Planning and HIV/AIDS: Comparison • Gradual increase for F.P and HIV/AIDS after Cairo until 2000. • Gain for HIV/AIDS at expense of F.P. • (in US$ million) • 1993 2000 2001 2002 • F.P. 287 409 356 • HIV/AIDS 55 521 587 2200

  7. International support to IPPF • 1952-1973: Brave and Angry: * FP as a basic human right. * Women political empowerment through FP • 1973-1984: Strategic conversion with all donors. Population Stabilization, but within respect for Human Rights. • 1984 to present. Europe: permanent conversion. • 1984 to 1992 and 2001 to present. US: from conversion to diversion. • 1984-1993 and 2001 to present: * Europe: From conversion to diversion with US.

  8. IPPF Income: 1970-2002 • (in US$ million) • 1970 1974 1985 1993 2002 • Total: 5.5 30 51 105 93 • US : 1.9 12 00 23 00 • EU: 10 • US Foundations: 4 9

  9. Effect of GGR: Examples from Africa * Kenya: 3 clinics closed (serving 56,000 clients). * Ghana: 30 CBD outlets closed ( serving 2 million people). * Benin: 4 CBD outlets closed. * Botswana: 1 clinic closed (serving 14,000 clients). * Ethiopia: CBD program rescued by the Dutch Embassy.

  10. Priorities for the next 10 years:Three areas lacking support . Unfinished business of family planning. • Adolescent and Young People’s Sexual and Reproductive Health. • Women’s right to legal and safe abortion. Universal access to RH services by 2015 as the 9Th MDG

More Related