LEARNING DISABILITIES AWARENESS Presented by Maureen Major Health Facilitator.
Strategic Analysis of Infectious Disease Eradication How the World Health Organization Can Become an...
-
Upload
jacob-harrington -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Strategic Analysis of Infectious Disease Eradication How the World Health Organization Can Become an...
Strategic Analysis of Infectious Disease Eradication
How the World Health Organization Can Become an Effective Facilitator of International
Public Health Cooperation
Simin Gharib Lee | April 28, 2009 | Economics 970 | Rajiv Shankar
Thesis and Roadmap
The WHO must partner with the private sector in order to successfully eradicate infectious diseases.
• Game 1: Eradication as a Public Good
• Game 2: Smallpox Eradication
• Game 3: Polio Eradication
Biological Background
A disease can be eradicated if it …
• Is a severe disease• Has no subclinical cases• Has a relatively low level of contagiousness• Has an effective and stable vaccine• Demonstrates seasonality • Has no animal reservoir
Game 1: Eradication as a Public Good
• NE is mutual defection
• Eradication is a weakest link public good
• So, this is not the best representation.
• But, conclude: need institutions to shift world to efficient outcome.
Game 2: Smallpox Eradication
• 1948: WHO created• 1949: USSR leaves WHO• 1955: US pushes malaria
eradication campaign• 1956: USSR returns • 1959: USSR pushes smallpox
eradication campaign (malaria campaign is failing)
• 1965: US supports campaign• 1966: only 8 countries have
donated for ~$27,000• 1980: Smallpox eradication is
certified
Game 2: Smallpox Eradication• Players: WHO and DONOR
• Payoffs: functions of cost C, reputation R, and lives saved L
YDONOR = -2C2 + R + L (1)
YWHO = 3(R + L) (2)
Game 2: Smallpox Eradication
• SPNE is for DONOR to back away from supporting WHO-led smallpox eradication.
• Consistent with events from 1959 - 1974
• Things to consider:– Fairness (Sigmund, Fehr,
and Nowak)– Biological properties of
smallpox
Game 3: Polio Eradication• Transformation from international
and intergovernmental to global health.
• 1988: WHO votes to eradicate polio by 2000
• 1999: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation established
• Today– Gates: $29.7b of assets– WHO: $6b annual budget– 4 countries left with polio: India,
Nigeria, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
Game 3: Polio Eradication
• Players: GATES, WHO, and LAST• Payoffs: functions of reputation R, lives saved
L, efficiency E, and domestic political instability P.
YWHO = 3(R + L) (2)
YGATES = 3L2 + E (3)
YLAST = -3P2 + 2L + R (4)
Game 3: Polio Eradication• SPNE is for last polio-endemic countries to
pursue/renew eradication efforts and for WHO and the Gates Foundation to cooperate to provide these countries with enough resources.
• Compare with reality: – $500m from Rotary International
– $630m from Gates (1/2009)
• But, polio may not be eradicable due to biological features (symptom expression, contagiousness, vaccine)
• Nonetheless, conclude that getting the eradication this far and successful eradication both require public-private partnership.
Limitations
• Payoffs• Argument only holds for ID that can be
eradicated • Issues with private-public partnership:
– WHO could become entangled in private interests of private partners
– Dampen incentive to contribute for others?– Dampen research activity in certain areas?
Summary• Infectious disease eradication is a global
public good that requires the intervention of an institution
• Smallpox eradication shows that financial burden is the most serious concern to donor countries
• Polio eradication shows that private foundations can fill the funding gap between WHO and donor countries to move eradication campaign forward.
• By partnering with the private sector, WHO can successfully eradicate disease.