Responsibility of governments of rich countries to help poor countries achieve better health
The authorities of the well-off countries are obliged to take care of those territories that are less strong economically. The reason for that is that the health situation of the planet is not restricted by the national borders, and the infectious illnesses spread regardless of the political divisions of the map. Moreover, many diseases have an incubation period, and can be transported through borders unnoticeably. One more important aspect is that the social and political stability at the regional levels depends, among the other factors, on the heath situation in developing countries. Lack of the healthcare can result in social disorders, protests, and hostility. There is an argument about the insufficient reaction by the First World countries, including the US, to the AIDS crisis in Africa since the major sources of help were provided by the non-governmental and charity organizations but not the countries’ leadership.
The healthiest and the least healthy regions of the developing world
The condition of the healthcare is often the factor that diversifies the developing countries from the progressive ones. The instrument that helps to measure the progress of the medical care, life quality, and life expectancy is the Human Development Index. This index is applied worldwide, and its aim is to compare the results from various regions with the differences in the economic, political, cultural, and geographical backgrounds that define differences in healthcare. The comparison usually discovers the inequality between the developed countries of the European and North-American regions and the African countries. Moreover, the healthcare in the latter is shown to be progressing slower compared to the other regions. Also, it lacks stability and sustainability because of the unstable income, high rates of unemployment and illiteracy (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2006).
The challenges of the programs scaling up pilot projects to a national scale
There are different approaches to promoting equality in healthcare on the national, regional, and globalized levels. However, each of those approaches has its own challenges, means of implementation, and selection criteria. One of those approaches that can be carried out on each level is so-called scaling up. The main objective of this method is to identify and promote different initiatives in healthcare, predict their challenges and outcomes, and contribute to their refinement and development. In other words, it refers to the increasing number of the heath-related projects and programs trying to upgrade the medical care on the different scales (Simmons, Fajans, & Ghiron, 2007). The larger the area of their operating capacity is, the more people they can help. However, the problem of the most of such initiatives is the lack of financial support from either governments or corporate world. As a result, they mostly function on the national or regional level from the funding of the citizens and do not have enough resources to enter the global level.
Identifying financially sustainable programs
The sustainability is defined mostly by the availability of the things that are important for the survival and comfortable life. The basic principle of the sustainable development of the human society is its harmony with the natural surroundings. Thus, the economic, political, social, technological, and urban development should not impede the functioning of the natural environment. From the perspective of sustainability, the well-being is more likely if the environment preserves its harmony and is not exploited or misused. In other words, the resources that we use, including water, oil, wood, and other natural materials, do not belong to our generation only (Jacobsen, 2014). However, the cautious use and the awareness of the environmental consequences are often ignored. Instead, government agencies calculated the duration of the resources, i.e. the time before the materials that we use run out. In order to identify the financially sustainable programs, we need to calculate how fast the resources renew themselves. The sustainable programs are those that offer to use only the amount of a certain resource that can be renewed within the time that it takes to renew it.
Cost-effectiveness and a criterion for policy makers and program planners care about
Cost-effectiveness in healthcare refers to the correlation between the amount of the funding of the healthcare system or the initiative and the successful outcomes that it achieved. It is a criterion for identifying whether certain program or initiative is able to make effective use of the costs. In terms of the cost-effectiveness, the majority of the healthcare interventions do not belong to the groups of risk because they are not expensive compared to other programs. The function of the health initiatives is social, not economic. With the use of minor expenses, they appeal to large populations and give effective results. Therefore, the governments themselves often initiate the healthcare interventions in their countries because it is cost-effective.
Criteria affecting the types of programs and interventions
The criterion of scaling up was applied in order to promote the necessity of solving the health crises in the developing countries. Some African regions and Thailand are suffering from AIDS, whereas the countries of South-Eastern Asia have substantial issues in overcoming tuberculosis and other life-threatening illnesses, to which the whole nations are exposed. Scaling up is a means to involve governments in the attempt to overcome those diseases. In addition to that, the criteria of duration and cost-effectiveness demonstrate that the healthcare programs are inexpensive but very effective in the developing countries, as the examples of vaccination in the Latin America show.
References
Jacobsen, K. H. (2014). Introduction to Global Health (2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Simmons, R., Fajans, P., & Ghiron, L. (2007). Scaling up health service delivery: from pilot innovations to policies and programmes. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. E. (2006). Income inequality and population health: a review and explanation of the evidence. Social science & medicine, 62(7), 1768-1784.