The challenge of middle-income countries to development assistance for health: recipients, funders, both or neither?
Recent developments have transformed the role and characteristics of middle-income countries (MICs). Many stakeholders now question the appropriate role of MICs in the system of development assistance for health (DAH), and key funders have already recast their approach to these countries. The pressing question is whether MICs should be recipients, funders, both or neither. The answer has deep implications for individual countries and their citizens, and for the DAH system as a whole. We clarify the fundamental issues involved and emphasise a special feature of many MICs: mid-level gross national income per capita (GNIpc) combined with substantial health needs and large inequalities. We discuss the trade-off between concerns for capacity and need, and illustrate a capacity-based approach to setting the level of a GNIpc eligibility threshold. We also discuss how needs-based exceptions and incentive-preserving instruments can complement such a threshold. Against this background, we outline options for the future roles of MICs in various circumstances. We conclude that major players in the DAH system have reason to reconsider the criteria for allocating DAH among countries and the norms for which countries should contribute and how much.
1Oslo Group on Global Health Policy,Department of Community Medicine and Global Health and Centre for Global Health,University of Oslo,Oslo,Norway.
Trygve
T
Ottersen
4Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health,Harvard University,Boston, MA,USA.
Suerie
S
Moon
4Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health,Harvard University,Boston, MA,USA.
John-Arne
JA
Røttingen
D005381:Financing, Organized; D014943:Global Health; D005102:Health Expenditures; D006292:Health Priorities; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand; D006801:Humans; D040841:Resource Allocation