From Resolutions to Emergencies, Financing Crisis Pushes WHO’s Work Out of Gear

Newsletter Edition #252 [The Files In-Depth]

Hi,

That the WHO has been underfunded over the years has been a well-known fact. But just how dependent it has been on a small group of donors is becoming painfully obvious.

The current crisis is more than just loss of financing as a result of the largest donor stepping away. The political implications of the financial crunch is beginning to emerge.

We have been reporting this week that countries are paying more attention to budgeting and efficiency. From costing of new resolutions, to emergency work on the field, and even expenses related to the conduct of meetings, few issues have been left uncoloured by this rapidly spreading crisis.

It is as if President Trump initiated litmus test, and the results are instantaneous for global health, revealing the way the field has functioned.

Here is our latest update from the ongoing Executive Board meeting.

We will continue to report on how foreign policy reframes global health, and what this forced transition at WHO means for people globally.

Thank you for reading.

---

If you find our work valuable, become a paying subscriber. Tracking global health policy-making in Geneva is tough and expensive. Help us in raising important questions, and in keeping an ear to the ground. Readers paying for our work helps us meet our costs.

Our gratitude to our subscribers who ensure we stay in the game!

---

Best,

Priti

Feel free to write to us: genevahealthfiles@gmail.com

Find us on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/genevahealthfiles.bsky.social

---

Illustration Credit: Amy Clarke, Chembe Collaborative

I. EB156

From Resolutions to Emergencies, Financing Crisis Pushes WHO’s Work Out of Gear

By Priti Patnaik & Nishant Sirohi

---

The 156th Executive Board meeting at the World Health Organization has turned into suspended animation, with member states scrutinizing the costs of implementing new resolutions, making fervent appeals to safeguard the institution’s work in addressing health emergencies on the field, even as some deliberate on how much to pay as membership fees.

Both its normative work and operational activities have been deeply affected with the proposed withdrawal of the United States as announced by President Donald Trump last month, revealing the dependence of the institution on not only American dollars but also expertise. (This week Argentina became the second member state in recent weeks, announcing withdrawal from the organization, this will also have implications on financing costs for other member states.)

While it is still early days since President Trump’s decision on WHO, 192 other member states have to address urgent financial challenges facing the organization as much as setting the political direction for global health since WHO since seen as the central coordinating authority for the field. (Not accounting for the U.S. and Argentina: 192 WHO member states.)

It was reported this week that the Trump administration might push for reforms and favour an American in charge of WHO during the next election for the Director-General. (To be sure, DG election is organized by secret ballot where every member state gets to vote.)

Member states will need to move swiftly not only on plugging the gap in financing, they will also need to simultaneously steer WHO at a time of geopolitical transitions and competing health emergencies.

Following the American move, the secretariat at WHO has been inundated with queries seeking explanations during the Executive Board meeting on not only the budgetary crisis but also on the implications on the loss of expertise, and the lack of information flows on vital health related events that feed into the organization’s analyses and scientific guidance. (This was a question raised by Belgium during the discussions.)

Many discussions this week are being looked at with a financing lens. Given the challenge of separating the political from the technical, countries are keen to know how the process of reprioritization will be conducted and what kinds of judgments will be exercised in making this determination.

We bring you an update on the state of play on some of these issues. This story also examines countries’ concerns on the financing on health emergencies that have dominated concerns this week. (See statements below)