The global health landscape faces unprecedented challenges, with the COVID-19 pandemic underscoring the universal vulnerabilities of health systems and existing financing arrangements. Similar risks are posed by climate change, necessitating additional resources to address climate-exacerbated health conditions and to build resilience for health systems. At present, there is a considerable resource gap for climate adaptation and mitigation in the health sector.
To bridge this gap and optimize outcomes for both sectors, the article “Climate and health: a path to strategic co-financing?” proposes a shift away from isolated financing towards strategic co-financing strategies. This approach aims to leverage the co-benefits of investments in health and climate, which are beneficial outcomes not directly related to the initial investments.
The authors introduce a framework for analyzing co-financing, distinguishing between:
- Promotive co-financing: Where funds from one sector support the goals of another. This includes health financing for climate goals (e.g., budgeting for risk reduction, incentivizing climate-conscious behavior) and climate finance for health goals (e.g., earmarking climate funds for health).
- Integrative co-financing: Involving joint or pooled funding from multiple budget holders for shared objectives.
Furthermore, co-financing can be categorized by its intent:
- Strategic co-financing: Proactively supports cross-sectoral goals through pre-emptive measures to reduce risks and enhance resilience.
- Passive co-financing: Indirectly supports cross-sectoral goals, often by addressing consequences ex post or through inaction.
The rigorous review conducted by the authors highlights several key findings:
- Climate change and related hazards significantly impact government, health insurance, and household health-related costs.
- Current evidence primarily addresses passive co-financing, reflecting the financial consequences of inaction rather than proactive strategies.
- Strategic co-financing remains under-explored and lacks sufficient funding to demonstrate its effectiveness.
- Integrative co-financing models are rarely implemented, indicating a need for greater cross-sectoral coordination.
- Climate finance is identified as an underutilized resource with substantial potential to generate additional revenue for the health sector.
Realizing the advantages of co-financing necessitates increased cross-sectoral collaboration, additional funding, and skills for integrating climate considerations into health plans and budgets, and mainstreaming health within climate adaptation and mitigation plans. Crucially, co-benefit monitoring is required to align health, climate mitigation, and adaptation goals, supported by stronger advocacy for the economic and environmental benefits of health investments. This study underscores the urgent need for more research and evaluation of co-financing strategies, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, to guide policy and maximize benefits for health systems facing climate risks.
Reference for this article:
Borghi, J., Cuevas, S., Anton, B., Iaia, D., Gasparri, G., Hanson, M. A., Soucat, A., Bustreo, F., & Langlois, E. V. (2024). Climate and health: a path to strategic co-financing? Health Policy and Planning, 39, i4–i18. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czae044
