Devex’s Post

Transcript

When it comes to NTD financing, there are many gaps. However, entities represent a 1.6 billion people sized problem and ironically they're one of the cheaper health interventions to deliver. The challenge is that we need to think more holistically about how and where that funding comes from. So for example, there are several gaps when it comes to specific elements of research and development specific elements. Of delivery, certain countries are underfunded relative to the burden. And I think it's very important that we start to break out of the silos. For too long, public health interventions have been delivered in silos and funded in silos, and we need to start telling the story of why eliminating NTD's is important for stakeholders outside of those currently in the NTD sector. First of all, I think the term innovative financing is thrown around too much. It can mean different things to different people and. Innovative doesn't have to mean complex. It doesn't have to include blockchain or AI or something that's being discussed here in Davos this week. It can simply be a new way of looking at the problem. And so as we think about innovative models for financing, it's more around, to me, what kind of collaborations can we put in place to pay more attention to these issues. Entities are reflective of the human condition there are prevalent in so many parts of the world and. I think for me, if we can take a community lens, a human lens and think about what collaborations are required to best serve that community, that is gonna serve us better in the long term when it comes to more sustainable financing models. I think as well when it comes to innovate innovations in financing for NTD's, we need to make sure that governments of endemic countries are at the heart of these conversations. And of fantastic example is Rwanda, Rwanda's government not only from the health sector, but they're looking at. NTD's as a challenge and an opportunity for collaboration across multiple different sectors. Agriculture, water, sanitation, even tourism. The entire government is looking at the problem of entities and solving it collectively, and that should be something that inspires financiers and supporters elsewhere. First of all. From an ethical and moral standpoint and a human standpoint, I think it's something that most people can agree on. But I think given that we're here in Davos talking about this, there is an economic imperative to eliminating disease. We can't articulate the value of the care economy accurately enough. We can't think about the value to future generations who no longer have to live in environments that are affected by NTD. And so for me, I think there's a very strong economic case to be made. Not just to philanthropists who are playing a huge role in our sector and we need them to continue to do so, but also to governments as well because governments need to understand what the potential return is on the investment when it comes to NTD elimination. First of all, when it comes to elimination, surveillance is critical not only to prove that elimination has actually taken place, but also make sure that it doesn't come back. Second of all, those surveillance systems are a critical part of the health infrastructure that needs strengthening often, and so investments in NTD elimination can actually yield benefits in other elements of the health infrastructure. Third of all, I think. There's need, there needs to be more done to help make the case for these investments and their benefit beyond even healthcare. I mean, we talk about in recent years, since COVID pandemic preparedness, emergency response, there's so much that governments need to do now to prepare for the next pandemic, whatever it might be. And what may seem like a relatively small investment in infrastructure for an NTD could yield benefits throughout that entire value chain.