Search

Effective medicines exist to address global health challenges including Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTD) and Noncommunicable Diseases (NCD) however these are often unavailable and unaffordable. To date, little literature exists comparing medicine unavailability across broad disease areas.Using insulin and praziquantel as tracer medicines this review aims to demonstrate that separating global health governance agendas for NCDs and NTDs ultimately impacts the effectiveness of coalitions for access for the poorest populations. Electronic literature searches were performed through Science Direct, PubMed, and Google Scholar (March-May2017 and updated in September-December2019) using keywords from Shiffman's framework; NCDs; NTDs; and for each medicine. Best practice from each area was analyzed.Many actors responded to the London Declaration which reinforced praziquantel's central role in control and elimination of schistosomiasis whereas access to affordable insulin emerged secondary to framing around prevention and management of diabetes. For insulin key stakeholders are not aligned around access. The position taken by pharmaceutical companies as donors versus commercial actors was critical to sustainable affordable access to these medicines. Integrated access models for low resource populations need shared pathways given the increasing need for essential medicines in the context of Universal Health Coverage.

The annual funding need for global health SDG targets is estimated by WHO at US$134 billion per year, rising to US$274-$371bn by 2030. This paper examines the challenge of making sustainable investment structures in global health more attractive for mainstream financial markets. The objective is a framework for targeted future debate with financial sector actors. Four case studies of innovative sustainable investment mechanisms are analysed, elaborating potential transfer of green and impact investment models in order to channel additional private sector funds to health. To increase private sector involvement, profit must accrue to providers of finance. The paper shows how health criteria can be incorporated into structures, which create triple bottom line return opportunities. Health infrastructure projects based on risk sharing models with governments or multilateral agencies could use long-term funding, with better credit ratings and lower cost of capital. Outcomes based investment, similar to green or social impact bonds, with third-party certification of measurable health impact, satisfy the private sector need for return with social interest objectives. Responsible investment could expand by adding a ‘health’ (H) criterion to the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) framework, implementing ESG+H for mainstream investment screening. These models are scalable, satisfy the need to dedicate funds to health and incorporate consistent critical success metrics. The conclusion finds that strong legal frameworks and exploration of fiscal incentives will be critical next steps to facilitate scaling up and broadening of interest from private sector financial actors. The impact these investments have on overall population health is a positive externality of sustainable global health investment.

The world faces multiple health financing challenges as the global health burden evolves. Countries have set an ambitious health policy agenda for the next 15 years with prioritisation of universal health coverage under the Sustainable Development Goals. The scale of investment needed for equitable access to health services means global health is one of the key economic opportunities for decades to come. New financing partnerships with the private sector are vital. The aim of this study is to unlock additional financing sources, acknowledging the imperative to link financial returns to the providers of capital, and create profitable, sustainable financing structures. This paper outlines the global health investment opportunity exploring intersections of financial and health sector interests, and the role investment in health can play in economic development. Considering increasing demand for impact investments, the paper explores responsible financing initiatives and expansion of the global movement for sustainable capital markets. Adding an explicit health component (H) to the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) investment criteria, creating the ESG+H initiative, could serve as catalyst for the inclusion of health criteria into mainstream financial actors’ business practices and investment objectives. The conclusion finds that health considerations directly impact profitability of the firm and therefore should be incorporated into financial analysis. Positive assessment of health impact, at a broad societal or environmental level, as well as for a firm’s employees can become a value enhancing competitive advantage. An ESG+H framework could incorporate this into mainstream financial decision-making and into scalable investment products.