- Michael Drummond, Professor, Centre for Health Economics, University of York
- Federico Augustovski, Director, HTA and Economic Evaluations; Professor of Public Health, IECS
- Jeanne-Marie Tucker, Consultant, National Health Insurance PHC Benefit Package, UNICEF South Africa
- Nachiket Mor, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Information Technology and Public Policy at IIIT Bangalore
- Peter Baker, Policy Fellow and Assistant Director, Center for Global Development
With the post-COVID 19 fiscal crises beginning to impact countries around the world, getting more health for your money has never been so important to policy makers. Countries have turned to priority setting techniques such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA) to ensure priority setting is evidence based, trade-offs are fully considered, and difficult decisions are taken explicitly and transparently. These approaches, however, often work best in a single payer system where a central authority has the power to review evidence, set priorities, make decisions and ensure their implementation. Many countries, however, have a plural health financing structure, with multiple payers; and many are federal, with health a state or regional prerogative. In this context, how should priority setting be carried out? What role, if any, should a central national priority setting agency have? What lessons can be drawn from highly plural and federal countries such as the South Africa, Argentina, and India?
If you have questions for our panelists, please submit your comments via YouTube.