An Idiot's Guide to Prioritization in the Health Sector

Every year, Ministries of Health the world over develop annual budgets for the health sector. Every year, donors, academicians, advocacy groups, medical trade unions and professional organizations, and health service managers and providers complain that the budgets have the wrong priorities. While all these groups are united in their unhappiness with the priorities reflected in these budgets, they disagree on what the priorities should be and on how the prioritization process should be conducted. A review of the published literature reveals a lack of consensus in the policy and academic communities on how best to prioritize health sector budgets. What is more surprising is that the literature review reveals little documentation on how countries actually do prioritize health expenditures. This paper attempts to address both gaps in information about prioritization. The first part of the paper describes hat goes into a prioritization exercise. This typically includes advocates, prioritization criteria, and methodologies for making choices. The first part also describes the analytical tools available to understand who gains and who loses from decisions taken in developing a budget for the health sector. The second part of the paper documents and actual prioritization exercise undertaken in Bangladesh between the years 1996 and 1999. As the title of this paper indicates, this is not a theoretical or academic paper. It is simply meant to empower potential practitioners by introducing them to the players involved in the process, the techniques utilized by these players, the political realities that drive the process, and some evaluation techniques.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Yazbeck, Abdo S.
Format: Working Paper biblioteca
Language:English
en_US
Published: World Bank, Washington, DC 2002-03
Subjects:HEALTH SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & REFORM, HEALTH ASPECTS, NUTRITION POLICY, DONORS, BUDGET DISCUSSIONS, HEALTH EXPENDITURES, METHODOLOGIES, DECISION MAKING, EVALUATION TECHNIQUES, ADVERSE SELECTION, AGE GROUPS, BURDEN OF DISEASE, COMMUNICABLE DISEASES, COMMUNITIES, COST-EFFECTIVENESS, DISEASE CONTROL, EMPLOYMENT, ESSENTIAL SERVICES PACKAGE, EXERCISES, EXTERNALITIES, EXTERNALITY, FACE VALUE, FAMILY PLANNING, FINANCIAL CRISES, GENDER, GENDER ISSUES, GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION, HEALTH CONDITIONS, HEALTH ECONOMICS, HEALTH INSURANCE, HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETS, HEALTH OUTCOMES, HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, HEALTH PROJECT, HEALTH PROVIDERS, HEALTH SECTOR, HEALTH SERVICE, HEALTH SERVICE MANAGERS, HEALTH SERVICES, HEALTH SYSTEM, HOSPITALS, HOUSEHOLDS, INCIDENCE ANALYSIS, INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INTERVENTION, LEPROSY, MORAL HAZARD, NUTRITION, PATIENT, PATIENTS, POPULATION GROUPS, PRIVATE SECTOR, PUBLIC EXPENDITURES, PUBLIC FINANCE, PUBLIC HEALTH, PUBLIC HEALTH SPENDING, PUBLIC PROVISION, PUBLIC SPENDING, RESOURCE ALLOCATION, RURAL AREAS, SCHOOL HEALTH, SLUMS, SOCIAL SERVICES, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, TRADE UNIONS HEALTH SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & REFORM,
Online Access:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2002/03/6630353/idiots-guide-prioritization-health-sector
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/13747
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!