The Human Rights Council is an intergovernmental body within the UN system responsible for strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe, and for addressing situations of human rights violations, and making recommendations on them, according to the UN. It has the ability to discuss all thematic human rights issues and situations that require its attention throughout the year. It meets at the United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG).
NEW YORK / GENEVA, Jul 11 2025 (IPS) – The United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) has expressed concern at the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ announcement that certain activities mandated by the council cannot be delivered due to a lack of funding. The council has sought clarity on why certain activities had been singled out.
The establishment of the commission offered a glimmer of hope in the face of grave and ongoing atrocities in the region, and it was hoped it might be an important step toward ending the cycle of abuse and impunity and delivering justice and reparations for victims and survivors.
It is not only the activities highlighted by the commissioner that are impacted by the funding crisis, however. Virtually all the HRC’s work has been affected, with investigations into rights abuses—for example in Sudan, Palestine, and Ukraine—reportedly operating at approximately 30-60 percent of capacity.
In discussions about the proposed cuts, several states—notably those credibly accused of rights abuses—have sought to use the financial crisis as cover to attack the council’s country-focused investigative mandates or undermine the Office of the High Commissioner’s broader work and independence. For example, Eritrea invoked the crisis in its ultimately unsuccessful effort to end council scrutiny of its own dismal rights record.
The United States’ failure to pay virtually anything at the moment, followed by China’s late payments, bear the greatest responsibility for the current financial shortfall given their contributions account for nearly half of the UN’s budget.
But they are not alone: 79 countries reportedly still haven’t paid their fees for 2025 (expected in February). Among those that haven’t yet paid this year are Eritrea, Iran, Cuba, Russia, and others that have used the crisis to take aim at the council’s country mandates or to undermine the work or independence of the high commissioner’s office.
Rather than seeking to meddle in the office’s work or reduce the HRC’s scrutiny of crises, states should work with the UN to ensure funds are available for at least partial delivery of all activities they mandate through the council, particularly in emergencies.
Urgent investigations into situations of mass atrocities are key tools for prevention, protection, and supporting access to justice. They cannot wait until the financial crisis blows over.
Lucy McKernan is United Nations Deputy Director, Advocacy, Human Rights Watch (HRW), and Hilary Power is UN Geneva Director, HRW
About 9.2 million people across the world living with HIV were not receiving treatment in 2024, according to the UNAIDS report. At the launch of the report was Rev. Mbulelo Dyasi, Executive Director of SANARELA. Winnie Byanyima, UNAIDS Executive Director, Aaron Motsoaledi, Minister of Health of South Africa. Juwan Betty Wani, Programme Coordinator, Adolescents Girls and young women Network South Sudan. Helen Rees, Executive Director, Wits RHI. Credit: UNAIDS
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 10 2025 (IPS) – UNAIDS called the funding crisis a ticking time bomb, saying the impact of the US cuts to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) could result in 4 million unnecessary AIDS-related deaths by 2029.
A historic withdrawal of global HIV/AIDS funding threatens to derail decades of hard-won progress in the fight against AIDS, according to UNAIDS’ annual report, entitled Aids, Crisis and the Power to Transform. This funding shortage – caused by sudden and massive cuts from international donors – is already dismantling frontline services, disrupting lifesaving treatments for millions and endangering countless lives in the world’s most vulnerable communities.
“This is not just a funding gap—it’s a ticking time bomb,” said UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima.
Despite major strides in 2024, including a decrease in new HIV infections by 40 percent and a decrease in AIDS-related deaths by 56% since 2010, the onset of restricted international assistance, which makes up 80 percent of prevention in low- and middle-income countries, could have disastrous effects. The report, mostly researched at the end of 2024, concluded that the end of AIDS as a public health threat by 2030 was in sight.
However, in early 2025 the United States government announced “shifting foreign assistance strategies,” causing them to withdraw aid from organizations like the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which had earlier promised 4.3 billion USD in 2025. PEPFAR is one of the primary HIV testing and treatment services in countries most affected. Such a drastic decision could have ripple effects, including pushing other major donor countries to revoke their aid. The report projected that if international funding permanently disappears, they expect an additional 6 million HIV infections and 4 million AIDS-related deaths by 2029.
At a Press Briefing, Assistant Secretary-General for UNAIDS Angeli Achrekar noted the importance of PEPFAR since its inception in 2003, calling it one of the most successful public health endeavors. She expressed hope that as the US lessens its support, other organizations and countries are able to take up the global promise of ending AIDS without eroding the gains already made.
Achrekar noted “acute shifts” in a weakening of commitment from countries less directly affected by HIV/AIDS since the US has pulled funding.
UNAIDS also reports a rising number of countries criminalizing populations most at risk of HIV – raising stigma and worsening gender-based violence and non-consensual sex, two of the highest HIV risk-enhancing behaviors. The report showed the primary groups who lacked care were child HIV infections and young women, which is likely related to government campaigns “attacking HIV-related human rights, including for public health, with girls, women and people from key populations.”
These punitive laws include criminalization or prosecution based on general criminal laws of HIV exposure, criminalization of sex work, transgender people and same-sex sexual activity and possession of small amounts of drugs. These laws have been on the rise for the past few years, and in conjunction with limited funding, the results for HIV/AIDS-positive patients could be fatal.
Recently, scientific breakthroughs have been made regarding long-acting medicine to prevent HIV infection. Health workers have seen tremendous success, both with new technologies like annual injections and the potential for more growth in the form of monthly preventative tablets and in old prevention techniques like condom procurement and distribution and access to clean, safe needles for drug users. However, due to various global conflicts and wars, supply chains have been disrupted, often harming countries not in the thick of the altercation but reliant on products like PrEP, an HIV prevention medication.
Although many countries most afflicted with the AIDS crisis have stepped up, promising more national funding for the issue, and many community networks have doubled down on their efforts, the disruption of supply chains and the lack of international frontline health workers cannot be solved overnight. To entirely restructure how healthcare is provided takes time – something those with HIV do not always have.
Areas like sub-Saharan Africa, which in 2024 housed half of the 9.2 million people not receiving HIV treatment, have been particularly affected by the recent changes. The majority of child infections still occur there, and combinations of “debt distress, slow economic growth and underperforming tax systems” provide countries in sub-Saharan Africa with limited fiscal room to increase domestic funding for HIV.
Despite the loss of funding, significant progress has been made to protect essential HIV treatment gains. South Africa currently funds 77% of its AIDS response, and its 2025 budget review includes a 3.3% annual increase for HIV and tuberculosis programs over the next three years. As of December 2024, seven countries in sub-Saharan Africa have achieved the 95-95-95 targets established by UNAIDS: 95% of people living with HIV know their status, 95% of those are on treatment, and 95% of those on treatment are virally suppressed. UNAIDS emphasized the importance of this being scaled up to a global level.
Achrekar observed, referring to countries whose domestic funds towards AIDS have increased, that “prevention is the last thing that is prioritized, but we will never be able to turn off the tap of the new infections without focusing on prevention as well.”
She reiterated the importance of countries most affected by the HIV/AIDS crisis establishing self-sustaining health practices to ensure longevity in both prevention and treatment.
Achrekar praised the global South for their work in taking ownership of treatment while still calling upon the rest of the world to join.
She said, “The HIV response was forged in crisis, and it was built to be resilient. We need, and are calling for, global solidarity once again, to rebuild a nationally owned and led, sustainable and inclusive multi-sectoral HIV response.”
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 1 2025 (IPS) – Five years from the 2030 deadline for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), we face a development emergency. The promise to eradicate poverty, combat climate change, and build a sustainable future for all is slipping away. The SDG financing gap has ballooned to over $4 trillion annually—a crisis compounded by declining aid, rising trade barriers, and a fragile global economy.
At the heart of this crisis is a systemic failure: the world’s most vulnerable nations—Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), and Small Island Developing States (SIDS)—are being left behind. The Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) in Seville is a historic chance to correct course.
We must seize it.
LDCs: Progress Stalled, Financing Denied
Three years into the Doha Programme of Action, LDCs are lagging precariously. Growth averages just 4.1%, far below the 7% target. FDI remains stagnant at a meager 2.5% of global flows, while ODA to LDCs fell by 3% in 2024. Worse, 29 LDCs now spend more on debt than health, and eight spend more on debt than education.
USG Rabab Fatima
These numbers demand action: scaled-up concessional finance, deep debt relief, and innovative tools like blended finance to unlock private investment. Without urgent measures, the 2030 Agenda will fail its most marginalized beneficiaries.
LLDCs: Trapped by Geography, Strangled by Finances
Six months after adopting the ambitious Awaza Programme of Action, LLDCs remain hamstrung by structural barriers. Despite hosting 7% of the world’s people, they account for just 1.2% of global trade, with export costs 74% higher than coastal nations. FDI has plummeted from $36 billion in 2011 to $23 billion in 2024, while ODA continues its downward spiral. Official Development Assistance (ODA) has also declined significantly from $38.1 billion in 2020 to $32 billion in 2023, with projections indicating continued downward trends.
The Awaza Programme outlines solutions—trade facilitation, infrastructure, and resilience—but these will remain empty promises without financing. FFD4 must align with its priorities, ensuring LLDCs get the investment they need to transform their economies.
For SIDS, the crisis is existential. Over 40% are in or near debt distress; 70% exceed sustainable debt thresholds. Between 2016 and 2020, they paid 18 times more in debt servicing than they received in climate finance. This is unconscionable. Countries on the frontlines of the climate crisis should not be left on the margins of global finance. Nations drowning in rising sea level – which they did not contribute to – should not be drowning in debt.
We can continue patching over cracks in a broken system. Or we can build a more equitable foundation for sustainable development, and for that addressing debt sustainability is not only an economic necessity, but also a development imperative. No country should be forced to choose between servicing debt and protecting its future.
The Way Forward: Solidarity in Action
FFD4 must deliver:
1. Debt relief and restructuring for LDCs, LLDCs, and SIDS to free up resources for development. 2. Scaling up concessional finance and honoring ODA commitments. 3. Mobilizing private capital through de-risking instruments and blended finance. 4. Climate finance justice, ensuring SIDS and LDCs receive grants and concessional finance, not loans, to build resilience.
The moral case is clear, but so is the strategic one: A world where billions are left in poverty and instability, should be a world of shared risks and responsibilities. FFD4 must be the moment we choose a different path—one of equity, urgency, and action. The time for excuses is over. The agreement on the Compromiso de Sevilla is the start – the real test will be its implementation.
As we move forward on those important responsibilities s and necessary actions, my Office, UN-OHRLLS, is with you every step of the way.
Rabab Fatima, UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries, and Small Island Developing States
Sarah Strack, Forus Director and Christelle Kalhoule, Forus Chair
Farmer in Colombia. Credit: Both Nomads/Forus
SEVILLE, Spain , Jun 23 2025 (IPS) – Can the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) be a turning point? The stakes are high. The international financial system—so important to each and every one of us—feels out of reach and resistant to change, because it is deeply entrenched in unjust power imbalances that keep it in place. We deserve better.
Under its current form, the Compromiso de Sevilla – the outcome document of FFD4 adopted on June 17 ahead of the conference – reads like a mildly improved version of business as usual with weak commitments. To avoid being derailed, decision-makers at FFD4 must act with clarity and courage, and here’s why.
With predatory interest rates, the international financial system is pushing hundreds of millions into misery as several nations continue to be shackled by a deepening debt crisis. While millions struggle without adequate food, healthcare, or education – basic services and rights – their governments must funnel billions to creditors.
Shockingly, 3.3 billion people – almost half of humanity – disproportionately in Global South nations, live in countries where debt interest payments outstrip education, health budgets and urgent climate action. This imbalance is particularly pernicious toward women, who bear the brunt of the failure of the gender-blind global financial architecture. This system fails to acknowledge and redistribute care and social reproduction responsibilities, resulting in women, especially those located in the Global South, lacking access to adequate essential services and decent jobs.
“The current model of international cooperation is not working, and its financing is also not working while we are facing a series of interconnected crises,” says Mafalda Infante, Advocacy and Communications Officer at the Portuguese Platform of Development NGOs, sharing their recently released Civil Society Manifesto for Global Justice calling for change and a restoration of fairness at FFD4 and beyond.
“Gender equality perspectives are absolutely central to how we understand global justice and financial reform, because let’s be clear: the current system isn’t neutral. It produces and reinforces inequalities, including gender-based ones. The debt crisis and climate emergency disproportionately affect women and girls, especially in the global south. We’ve seen it again and again when public services are cut, when healthcare is underfunded or when food systems collapse, it’s women who carry the heaviest burden. But at the same time, feminist economics also offer solutions. They challenge the idea that GDP growth is the ultimate goal. They prioritise care, sustainability and community well-being. They demand that financing should be people-centered and rights-based and accountable as well. So the role of civil society has been to bring these ideas into the FFD4 space to connect macroeconomic reform with everyday realities and to insist that justice – economic, climate, racial, gender justice – is indivisible,” Infante adds.
FFD4 offers an opportunity to reimagine a financial architecture that can be just, inclusive, and rights-based. This is not a technical summit for experts alone. It is the only global forum where governments, international institutions, civil society organisations, community representatives and the private sector sit together to shape the future of global finance, and it’s happening after 10 years since the latest edition in Addis Ababa.
But there are realities that decision-makers just can’t shy away from. While some powerful countries borrow at rock-bottom rates, other nations face interest charges nearly four times higher. We must thus ask ourselves: is this really a pathway to truly sustainable development or a continuation of profound financial injustices through something akin to “financial colonialism” ?
“Many countries like us in the South, are totally concerned that there can be no development with the current debt situation not discussed. The issue of debt vis-a-vis taxes is vitally important. The money that countries are collecting from the domestic mobilization of resources is all channeled to self-debt servicing. And debt handcuffs social policy. Without these resources, these countries cannot deliver on public services like health and education. There can be no way of improving people’s social indicators without addressing the question of debt stress,” says Moses Isooba , Executive Director of the Uganda National NGO Forum (UNNGOF).
We call for a radical transformation of global finance that moves away from a system that enables “tax abuse” and outsized influence from a powerful few.
A crucial step for transformation is creating a UN Convention on Sovereign Debt to fairly and transparently restructure and cancel illegitimate debt, as many countries spend more on debt than on essential services.
In today’s context of shrinking development aid, the role of public development banks is ever more important in support of Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement on climate change. Forus therefore calls on public development banks to work in partnership with civil society and community representatives through a formal global coalition and local engagement to ensure development finance is locally-led and reflects the real needs of people, rooted in consent and mutual trust.
Official development assistance (ODA) must be protected and increased, reversing harmful aid cuts that damage civil society as well as urgent and basic services. The UN has warned that aid funding for dozens of crises around the world has dropped by a third, largely due to the decrease in US funding slashed US funding and announced cuts from other nations.
Finally, governments should support a new UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, adopting gender-responsive, environmentally sustainable fiscal policies while disincentivizing polluters and extractive industries.
“Development financing must not perpetuate cycles of debt, austerity, and dependency. Instead, it must be grounded in democratic governance, fair taxation, climate justice, and respect for human rights. It’s also crucial to promote inclusive decision-making by strengthening the role of the United Nations in global economic governance, countering the dominance of informal and exclusive clubs such as the OECD,” says Henrique Frota, Executive Director of the Brazilian Association of NGOs (ABONG) and former C20 Brazil Chair.
FFD4 must ensure that there is a genuine space for civil society engagement, where all voices are heard and can influence financial decision making, to strengthen accountability and transparency, and to promote greater inclusion.
“The voices of the communities most affected should be included, otherwise large-scale development projects are not sustainable. Local communities and local civil society are the point of contact to make implementation more inclusive,” says Pallavi Rekhi, Programmes Lead at Voluntary Action Network India (VANI), reinforcing that FFD4 must shift from vague aspirations to binding, systemic reforms that rebalance power and serve justice.
“Don’t take stock of what has been done. Instead, look at what has not yet been done at this conference and you will see the immense challenges that lie ahead for the future of our planet,” says Marcelline Mensah-Pierucci, President of FONGTO, the national platform of civil society organisations in Togo.
“The continuous cycle of unfairness and social inequality must come to an end. The time to act is now,” adds Zia ur Rehman, Chairperson of Pakistan Development Alliance.
For many, the road to Sevilla has been long and hard and still, the world’s majority are left behind on this journey. The hard work continues after FFD4 on the need for bold leadership, real action and transformative change that can lead to a more effective and responsive global financial architecture.
A young Afghan girl studies at home following the Taliban’s banning of women and girls from pursuing secondary education. Credit: UNICEF/Amin Meerzad
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 23 2025 (IPS) – Nearly four years ago, the Taliban took control of Afghanistan and issued a series of edicts that significantly restricted women’s rights nationwide. This has resulted in a multifaceted humanitarian crisis, one marked by a notable decline in civic freedoms, stunted national development, and a widespread lack of basic services.
On June 17, UN-Women published its 2024 Afghanistan Gender Index, a comprehensive report that details the gender disparities and worsening humanitarian conditions for women and girls across the country. According to the report, the edicts issued by the Taliban have restricted women’s rights to the point that women and girls in the country have fallen far below the global benchmarks for human development.
“Since [2021], we have witnessed a deliberate and unprecedented assault on the rights, dignity and very existence of Afghan women and girls. And yet, despite near-total restrictions on their lives, Afghan women persevere,” said Sofia Calltorp, UN Women’s Chief of Humanitarian Action. “The issue of gender inequality in Afghanistan didn’t start with the Taliban. Their institutionalised discrimination is layered on top of deep-rooted barriers that also hold women back.”
It is estimated that women in Afghanistan have 76 percent fewer rights than men in areas such as health, education, financial independence, and decision-making. In addition, Afghan women are afforded, on average, 17 percent of their rights while women worldwide have 60.7 percent.
This disparity is projected to further widen following the Taliban’s ban on women holding positions in the health sector, removing one of the final strongholds for female autonomy in Afghanistan. Today, roughly 78 percent of Afghan women lack access to any form of formal education, employment, or training, nearly four times the rate for Afghan men. UN Women projects that the rate of secondary school completion for girls will soon fall to zero percent for girls and women.
Furthermore, Afghanistan has one of the widest workforce gaps in the world, with 89 percent of men having roles in the labour force, compared to 24 percent of women. Women are more likely to work in domestic roles and have lower-paying, more insecure jobs. Additionally, there are zero women that hold roles in national or local decision-making bodies, effectively excluding them entirely from having their voices heard on a governmental level.
“Afghanistan’s greatest resource is its women and girls,” said UN Women’s Executive Director Sima Bahous. “Their potential continues to be untapped, yet they persevere. Afghan women are supporting each other, running businesses, delivering humanitarian aid and speaking out against injustice. Their courage and leadership are reshaping their communities, even in the face of immense restrictions.”
The exclusion of all Afghan women from the workforce has had significant impacts on the local economy. According to the United Nations Sustainable Development Group (UNSDG), since 2021 Afghanistan’s economy has seen losses of up to 1 billion USD per year, representing roughly 5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. This has led to an overall increase in poverty levels and food insecurity.
“Overlapping economic, political, and humanitarian crises — all with women’s rights at their core — have pushed many households to the brink. In response – often out of sheer necessity — more women are entering the workforce,” Calltorp said.
Furthermore, women in Afghanistan lack any form of economic independence. UN Women estimates that only 6.8 percent of women have access to basic financial resources such as bank accounts and mobile money services. Edicts that prevent women from accessing financial independence will leave the vast majority of Afghan women unequipped for a self-sustainable future.
Afghanistan has also seen a significant surge in rates of gender-based violence since the Taliban’s rise to power. According to the report, Afghan women are exposed to nearly three times the global average rates of intimate-partner violence. Other practices, such as forced and child marriages and honor killings, exacerbate the national levels of gender inequality. Amnesty International states that non-compliance often results in retaliation from the Taliban, with women and girls facing arrests, rape, and torture.
In November 2023, Afghanistan’s de-facto Ministry of Public Health banned women’s access to psychosocial support services, leaving the vast majority of victims of gender-based violence without the adequate resources to recover while perpetrators receive impunity. Additionally, the elimination of women’s healthcare, including women’s access to reproductive health and education services, has made it difficult for many women to find basic care.
Due to these challenges, UN Women believes that Afghan women are less likely than men to live the majority of their lives in good health. It is estimated that the life expectancy of Afghan women is far lower than the global average and is projected to worsen in the coming years.
According to CIVICUS Global Alliance, current civic space conditions in Afghanistan are listed as “closed”, representing one of the worst environments for civic freedoms in the world. Josef Benedict, the Monitor Asia Researcher of CIVICUS, states that the women’s rights issues in Afghanistan have deteriorated to the point that it resembles a “gender apartheid”.
“There has been severe repression and systemic gender-based discrimination faced by Afghan women and girls under the Taliban. Women and girls are being systematically erased from public life and are being denied fundamental human rights, including access to employment, education, and opportunities for political and social engagement,” said Benedict.
“The international community must do more to provide support for women and girls in and from Afghanistan by calling for dismantling of the institutionalized system of gender oppression, ensure the representative, equal, meaningful and safe participation of Afghan women in all discussions concerning the country’s future and support community-led initiatives promoting gender equality and women’s rights.”
Additionally, activists and dissenters are routinely punished by the Taliban, facing harassment, intimidation, and violence. Journalists are often targeted, underscoring the risks of speaking out against a repressive government in an increasingly volatile environment.
“The rating is also due to the crackdown on press freedom,” said Benedict. “Nearly four years on, governments have failed to ensure a strong, united international response to counter the Taliban’s extreme repression, take steps to hold the Taliban accountable or to effectively support Afghan activists in the country and those in exile.”
Parents and caregivers line up with their children at an immunization centre in Janakpur, southern Nepal. Meanwhile recent funding cuts have caused “severe disruptions” to health services in almost three-quarters of all countries, according to the head of the UN World Health Organization (WHO), Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. April 2025. Credit: UNICEF
LONDON, Jun 19 2025 (IPS) – As G7 leaders of the world’s wealthiest nations wrapped up their summit in Kananaskis June 16, a critical issue was absent from the agenda: the future of global health financing.
Amid escalating geopolitical tensions, trade conflicts and cuts to development aid, health has been sidelined – less than five years since COVID-19 devastated lives, health systems and economies.
With the fiscal space for health shrinking in over 69 countries, it’s time to recognise that health financing is no longer solely a public sector concern; it is a fundamental pillar of economic productivity, stability, and resilience.
A glimmer of hope has emerged from South Africa, the current G20 Presidency host, and from the World Health Organization (WHO). A landmark health financing resolution, adopted at last month’s World Health Assembly calls on countries to take ownership of their health funding and increase domestic investment.
While this is a promising step, the prevailing discourse continues to rely on outdated solutions which are often slow to implement and fall short of what is needed.
Invest Smarter, Not Just More, in Health
Recent trends among G20 countries show that annual healthcare expenditure is actually declining across member states. In 2022, health expenditure dropped in 18 out of 20 G20 nations, leading to increased out-of-pocket expenses for citizens.
While countries like Japan, Australia, and Canada demonstrate a direct correlation between higher per capita health expenditure and increased life expectancy, others, such as Russia, India, and South Africa, show the opposite.
This disparity underscores a crucial point: the quality and efficiency of investment matters more than quantity. Smart investment encompasses efficient resource allocation, equitable access to affordable care, effective disease prevention and management, and broader determinants of health like lifestyle, education, and environmental factors.
Achieving positive outcomes hinges on balancing health funding – the operational costs – with sustainable health financing – the capital costs.
Private capital is already moving into health, what’s missing is coordination and strategic alignment
Despite the surge in healthcare private equity reaching USD 480 billion between 2020 and 2024, many in the sector remain unaware of this significant shift. Recent G20 efforts have focused on innovative financing tools, but what’s truly needed are systemic reforms that reframe health as a core pillar of financial stability, economic resilience, and geopolitical security, not just a public service.
The answer is simple: since the first ever G20 global health discussions under Germany’s G20 Presidency in 2017, there has been no consistent effort to rethink or coordinate investments. G20 countries still lack a strategic dialogue between governments, health and finance ministries, investors and the private sector.
Market-Driven, Government-Incentivised: The Path Forward
Building on the European Union’s Green Taxonomy, the health taxonomy aims to foster a shared understanding and common language among governments, companies, and investors to drive sustainable health financing. Investors, Asset Managers, Venture Capitalists, G20 Ministries of Health and Finance, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), and International Organisations broadly agree that a market-driven taxonomy is both credible and practical.
Governments can have greater confidence knowing it has been tested with investors and is grounded in market realities.
The Health Taxonomy report identifies a key barrier to progress: the fundamental confusion between health funding and health financing: Health financing refers to the system that manages health investments, such as raising revenue, pooling resources and purchasing services. In contrast, health funding refers to the actual sources of money.
Increasing health funding alone will not improve health outcomes if the financing system is poorly designed. Conversely, a well-developed health financing framework won’t succeed without sufficient funding. Both are essential and must work together.
The health taxonomy has the potential to serve as a vital tool for policy planning sessions, strategic boardroom discussions and investment committees, thereby enabling health to be readily integrated into existing portfolios and strategies. It could also support more systematic assessments of health-related risks and economic impacts, including through existing processes like the IMF’s Article IV consultations and other macroeconomic surveillance frameworks.
The report urges leading G20 health and finance ministers to rethink and align on joint principles for health funding and financing.
The next pandemic could be more severe, more persistent, and more costly. Failure to invest adequately in health before the next crisis is a systemic risk our leaders can no longer afford to ignore.
Hatice Beton is Co-Founder, H20Summit; Roberto Durán-Fernández; PhD, is Tec de Monterrey School of Government, Former Member of the WHO’s Economic Council; Dennis Ostwald is Founder & CEO, WifOR Institute (Germany); Rifat Atun is Professor of Global Health Systems, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
