Hi,

The funding crisis in global health and at WHO is bringing new idioms and vocabulary to Geneva.

At an event this week, one global health scholar termed the current phase as “Zwischenzeit” - an “in-between” time between changing orders. (Reminded me of “huzun” or “inexplicable sadness” from Orhan Pamuk’s Istanbul.)

In today’s edition, we bring you a wrap on the financing discussions not only at the World Health Assembly, but at side events around the town that capture how non-state actors view the current crisis.

Find our work valuable? Consider 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 are able to pursue public interest journalism.

Best,

Priti

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

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

Donate to support our journalism

I. WHA78: ON FINANCING

Countries Agree To Pay More To WHO During The Greatest Disruption To Global Health Financing

Priti Patnaik & Bianca Carvalho

Iman Imbrahim contributed to this story

WHO member states have agreed to pay nearly US$1 billion for the next two years to WHO by agreeing to a previously negotiated increase in membership dues, at a time when the organization faces a debilitating financial crunch that has shrunk its leadership team, affected operations and will see hundreds of job losses across the board in the coming months.

The on-going World Health Assembly also saw countries approving the Programme Budget for 2026-2027 of US$ 4.2 billion, even as the organization is in the process of recasting its priorities. (The new budget is the first one in line with WHO’s strategy for the next four years - the Fourteenth General Programme of Work, 2025–2028 (GPW 14).

WHO DG Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus put the budget numbers into perspective, in his annual address to the Assembly:

“…We know that in the current landscape, mobilizing that sum will be a challenge. We are not naïve to that challenge, but for an organization working on the ground in 150 countries, with the vast mission and mandate that Member States have given us, US$ 4.2 billion for two years – or 2.1 billion a year – is not ambitious, it’s extremely modest.

I hope you will agree with me, and I will tell you why:

US$ 2.1 billion is the equivalent of global military expenditure every eight hours;

US$ 2.1 billion is the price of one stealth bomber – to kill people;

US$ 2.1 billion is one-quarter of what the tobacco industry spends on advertising and promotion every single year. And again, a product that kills people…”

During the Assembly, Switzerland pledged US$ 80 million, and China indicated additional funding of US$ 500 million over five years (also reflecting the increase in its dues). This was in addition to US$ 170 million raised during the pledging event this week. (See pledges so far).

Announcing additional contributions of US$80 million, Switzerland said at the opening of the Assembly that WHO represents both collective and individual responsibility in health cooperation.

The organization faces a gap of more than US$ 1.8 billion over the next two years, apart from a shortfall of more than US$ 500 million towards salary costs in the current year.

In this story we look at the financing piece considered at the Assembly, and the parallel conversations on how the financial crunch will reshape the global health architecture. These discussions are occurring alongside the Assembly, making space for visions for the future that could alter the size, mandate of WHO, relative to other players.