Independent and American Samoa have a shared cultural, genetic, ethnolinguistic, and historical background but have been politically separated since 1899. In this essay, we examine the health of these two polities and identify two key health patterns that have emerged even as American Samoa has achieved a higher per capita income than Independent Samoa. Whereas the gender gap in life expectancy at birth has narrowed in Independent Samoa, this gap has not narrowed in American Samoa and its male life expectancy now lags behind that of Independent Samoa. Neonatal mortality rates in American Samoa are slightly higher than in Independent Samoa. These patterns may be linked to the higher rates of obesity and urbanization observed in American Samoa compared to Independent Samoa, as well as the differing political and institutional arrangements of the two polities. Limited data remains a persistent challenge to conducting analysis of public health in the Pacific islands, particularly in American Samoa.
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 96, Heft 2, S. 129-134
AbstractWith limited international resources for family planning, donors must decide how to allocate their funds to different countries. How can a donor for family planning decide whether countries are adequately prioritized for funding? This article proposes an ordinal ranking framework to identify under‐prioritized countries by rank‐ordering countries by their need for family planning and separately rank‐ordering them by their development assistance for family planning. Countries for which the rank of the need for family planning is lower than the rank of its funding are deemed under‐prioritized. We implement this diagnostic methodology to identify under‐prioritized countries that have a higher need but lower development assistance for family planning. This approach indicates whether a country is receiving less compared to other countries with similar levels of need.
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 92, Heft 6, S. 457-458
Per capita GDP has limited use as a well-being indicator because it does notcapture many dimensions that imply a "good life", such as health and equality ofopportunity. However, per capita GDP has the virtues of being easy to interpret andto calculate with manageable data requirements. Against this backdrop, there is aneed for a measure of well-being that preserves the advantages of per capita GDP,but also includes health and equality. We propose a new parsimonious indicatorto fill this gap, and calculate it for 149 countries. This new indicator could beparticularly useful in complementing standard well-being indicators during theCOVID-19 pandemic. This is because (i) COVID-19 predominantly affects olderadults beyond their prime working ages whose mortality and morbidity do notstrongly affect GDP, and (ii) COVID-19 is known to have large effects on inequalityin many countries.
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 92, Heft 6, S. 452-453
Background An adequate amount of prepaid resources for health is important to ensure access to health services and for the pursuit of universal health coverage. Previous studies on global health financing have described the relationship between economic development and health financing. In this study, we further explore global health financing trends and examine how the sources of funds used, types of services purchased, and development assistance for health disbursed change with economic development. We also identify countries that deviate from the trends. Methods We estimated national health spending by type of care and by source, including development assistance for health, based on a diverse set of data including programme reports, budget data, national estimates, and 964 National Health Accounts. These data represent health spending for 184 countries from 1995 through 2014. We converted these data into a common inflation-adjusted and purchasing power-adjusted currency, and used non-linear regression methods to model the relationship between health financing, time, and economic development. Findings Between 1995 and 2014, economic development was positively associated with total health spending and a shift away from a reliance on development assistance and out-of-pocket (OOP) towards government spending. The largest absolute increase in spending was in high-income countries, which increased to purchasing power-adjusted $5221 per capita based on an annual growth rate of 3.0%. The largest health spending growth rates were in upper-middle-income (5.9) and lower-middle-income groups (5.0), which both increased spending at more than 5% per year, and spent $914 and $267 per capita in 2014, respectively. Spending in low-income countries grew nearly as fast, at 4.6%, and health spending increased from $51 to $120 per capita. In 2014, 59.2% of all health spending was financed by the government, although in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 29.1% and 58.0% of spending was OOP spending and 35.7% and 3.0% of spending was development assistance. Recent growth in development assistance for health has been tepid; between 2010 and 2016, it grew annually at 1.8%, and reached US$37.6 billion in 2016. Nonetheless, there is a great deal of variation revolving around these averages. 29 countries spend at least 50% more than expected per capita, based on their level of economic development alone, whereas 11 countries spend less than 50% their expected amount. Interpretation Health spending remains disparate, with low-income and lower-middle-income countries increasing spending in absolute terms the least, and relying heavily on OOP spending and development assistance. Moreover, tremendous variation shows that neither time nor economic development guarantee adequate prepaid health resources, which are vital for the pursuit of universal health coverage. ; Peer reviewed
Background The amount of resources, particularly prepaid resources, available for health can affect access to health care and health outcomes. Although health spending tends to increase with economic development, tremendous variation exists among health financing systems. Estimates of future spending can be beneficial for policy makers and planners, and can identify financing gaps. In this study, we estimate future gross domestic product (GDP), all-sector government spending, and health spending disaggregated by source, and we compare expected future spending to potential future spending. Methods We extracted GDP, government spending in 184 countries from 1980-2015, and health spend data from 1995-2014. We used a series of ensemble models to estimate future GDP, all-sector government spending, development assistance for health, and government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private health spending through 2040. We used frontier analyses to identify patterns exhibited by the countries that dedicate the most funding to health, and used these frontiers to estimate potential health spending for each low-income or middle-income country. All estimates are inflation and purchasing power adjusted. Findings We estimated that global spending on health will increase from US$9.21 trillion in 2014 to $24.24 trillion (uncertainty interval [UI] 20.47-29.72) in 2040. We expect per capita health spending to increase fastest in upper-middle-income countries, at 5.3% (UI 4.1-6.8) per year. This growth is driven by continued growth in GDP, government spending, and government health spending. Lower-middle income countries are expected to grow at 4.2% (3.8-4.9). High-income countries are expected to grow at 2.1% (UI 1.8-2.4) and low-income countries are expected to grow at 1.8% (1.0-2.8). Despite this growth, health spending per capita in low-income countries is expected to remain low, at $154 (UI 133-181) per capita in 2030 and $195 (157-258) per capita in 2040. Increases in national health spending to reach the level of the countries who spend the most on health, relative to their level of economic development, would mean $321 (157-258) per capita was available for health in 2040 in low-income countries. Interpretation Health spending is associated with economic development but past trends and relationships suggest that spending will remain variable, and low in some low-resource settings. Policy change could lead to increased health spending, although for the poorest countries external support might remain essential. ; Peer reviewed