Three Case Studies in Making Fair Choices on the Path to Universal Health Coverage

Health and Human Rights 18 (2):11-22 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The goal of achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) can generally be realized only in stages. Moreover, resource, capacity and political constraints mean governments often face difficult trade-offs on the path to UHC. In a 2014 report, Making fair choices on the path to UHC, the WHO Consultative Group on Equity and Universal Health Coverage articulated principles for making such trade-offs in an equitable manner. We present three case studies which illustrate how these principles can guide practical decision-making. These case studies show how progressive realization of the right to health can be effectively guided by priority-setting principles, including generating the greatest total health gain, priority for the worse off, and financial risk protection. They also demonstrate the value of a fair and accountable process of priority setting.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Response to Our Critics.Alex Voorhoeve, Trygve Ottersen & Ole Frithjof Norheim - 2016 - Health Economics, Policy and Law 11 (1):103-111.
The Administrator's Perspective.Addis Tamire Woldemariam - 2016 - Health Econonics, Policy and Law 11:79-83.
Priorities in the Israeli health care system.Frida Simonstein - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (3):341-347.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-06-10

Downloads
442 (#43,979)

6 months
86 (#55,264)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?