Search

Summary The Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa was unprecedented in both its scale and impact. Out of this human calamity has come renewed attention to global health security—its definition, meaning, and the practical implications for programmes and policy. For example, how does a government begin to strengthen its core public health capacities, as demanded by the International Health Regulations? What counts as a global health security concern? In the context of the governance of global health, including WHO reform, it will be important to distil lessons learned from the Ebola outbreak. The Lancet invited a group of respected global health practitioners to reflect on these lessons, to explore the idea of global health security, and to offer suggestions for next steps. Their contributions describe some of the major threats to individual and collective human health, as well as the values and recommendations that should be considered to counteract such threats in the future. Many different perspectives are proposed. Their common goal is a more sustainable and resilient society for human health and wellbeing.

We estimate the distributional incidence of health care financing in 13 Asian territories that account for 55% of the Asian population. In all territories, higher-income households contribute more to the financing of health care. The better-off contribute more as a proportion of ability to pay in most low- and lower-middle-income territories. Health care financing is slightly regressive in three high-income economies with universal social insurance. Direct taxation is the most progressive source of finance and is most so in poorer economies. In universal systems, social insurance is proportional to regressive. In high-income economies, the out-of-pocket (OOP) payments are proportional or regressive while in low-income economies the better-off spend relatively more OOP. But in most low-/middle-income countries, the better-off not only pay more, they also get more health care.

The article compares the incidence of public healthcare across 11 Asian countries and provinces, testing the dominance of healthcare concentration curves against an equal distribution and Lorenz curves and across countries. The analysis reveals that the distribution of public healthcare is prorich in most developing countries. That distribution is avoidable, but a propoor incidence is easier to realize at higher national incomes. The experiences of Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Thailand suggest that increasing the incidence of propoor healthcare requires limiting the use of user fees, or protecting the poor effectively from them, and building a wide network of health facilities. Economic growth may not only relax the government budget constraint on propoor policies but also increase propoor incidence indirectly by raising richer individuals' demand for private sector alternatives.

This paper reports on a project to improve the comparability and availability of private health expenditure under the joint health accounts questionnaire (JHAQ) data collection. The JHAQ is a framework for joint data collection in the area of health expenditure data developed by OECD, Eurostat, and WHO. In particular, the study questions were: How to overcome the inherent tendency for much private health care financing to occur without the generation of linked, reliable, and comprehensive routine data? How to tackle the issue of private providers likely to operate without reporting of routine data to statistical agencies?

To elicit the public's views on health system issues, we conducted an opinion poll survey in Bangladesh, Mongolia, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. We focused on health inequalities. The results show high levels of dissatisfaction with government health services in all four of the countries. Access to government health services was an important concern. A sizable number of respondents reported that their governments did not consider their views at all in shaping health care services. The policy implications of the study findings are discussed. [Health Affairs 28, no. 4 (2009): 1067-1077; 10.1377/hlthaff.28.4.1067]