Priority setting and the 'neglected' tropical diseases.
In this paper David Canning argues that interventions against 'neglected' tropical diseases should be thought of as investments in human capital and form an integral part of global poverty reduction. He argues that overall burden of disease should not be the criterion for priority setting; if the goal is to maximize health benefits from a fixed health budget then cost-effective interventions should be prioritized. Whilst many people find objectionable the assignment of a monetary value to health, a cost-benefit approach, combining health and economic benefits, would allow the health sector to present arguments to policy makers, based on the rate of return on investment. Since many health interventions in low-income countries have exceptionally high rankings in terms of cost-benefit ratios, this should result in large flows from other sectors to the health sector.
Canning
David
D
Harvard School of Public Health, 665 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA. dcanning@hsph.harvard.edu
D003141:Communicable Diseases / Q000191:economics*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D014943:Global Health; D017048:Health Care Costs; D006291:Health Policy / Q000191:economics; D006292:Health Priorities / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D010272:Parasitic Diseases / Q000191:economics*; D011203:Poverty / Q000517:prevention & control; D014330:Tropical Medicine / Q000191:economics*