Modern welfare in the United Kingdom is a universal (dis)credit to Beveridge. Is it time for a basic income?

Universal Credit signalled a revolution in the delivery and costs of welfare provisioning. UC aimed to reduce spending on welfare, but in doing so now threatens the stability of a functioning and cohesive society. Over recent years, and most notably during the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become ever clearer that adequate social security is vital to the functioning of society, as well as to the health and well-being of the population. Yet this period has also served to highlight the fragility and insufficiency of welfare in the United Kingdom. This article explores how the current welfare crisis, is associated with UC. In this article, we also consider the uncertainty that UC has created in most recipients. We argue that there are other ways to support the most vulnerable in society, and that we are now at that critical juncture in needing to make significant change. Universal Basic Income (UBI) offers one such alternative by offering stable, individual, non-means tested, and unconditional money transfers, to all citizens. Over the last decade, there have been multiple experiments around the world trialling basic income, each of which has a specific focus, or target population, as different elements of a UBI were scrutinised. In this article, we reflect upon what we consider to be the potential shortcomings of the current welfare system in the United Kingdom as a move away from its origin, arguing that the United Kingdom is now primed for UBI to be considered a fair and legitimate way to provide social security

Governance Challenges in International Health Financing and Implications for the New Pandemic Fund

Abstract Background: The failures of the international COVID-19 response highlighted key gaps in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The G20 and WHO have called for additional funding of $10.5 billion per year to adequately strengthen the global PPR architecture. In response to these calls, in 2022 the World Bank announced the launch of a new Financial Intermediary Fund (The Pandemic Fund) to catalyse this additional funding. However, there is considerable unclarity regarding the governance makeup and financial modalities of the Pandemic Fund, and divergence of opinion about whether the Fund has been successfully designed to respond to key challenges in global health financing. Methods/ results: To better situate the Pandemic Fund within discussions about existing challenges in global health financing, this article presents the results of a scoping review identifying key challenges associated with international health financing instruments. A total of 73 documents were collected from which 51 were reviewed for analysis. Thematic analysis identified eight thematic groupings that emerged from the literature which were then used as policy criteria to assess the current governance and financing design of the Pandemic Fund using available information on the Fund. The eight themes in hierarchical order of frequency were: misaligned aid allocation; accountability; multistakeholder representation and participation; country ownership; donor coherency and fragmentation; transparency; power dynamics, and; anti-corruption. Assessment of the Pandemic Fund against these criteria found that although some mechanisms have been adopted to recognise and address challenges, overall, the Pandemic Fund has unclear policies in response to most of the challenges while leaving many unaddressed. Conclusion: It remains unclear how the Pandemic Fund is explicitly addressing the eight challenges identified. Moreover, there is evidence that the Pandemic Fund might be exacerbating these global financing challenges, thus raising questions about its potential efficacy, suitability, and chances of success. In response, this article offers three sets of policy recommendations for how the Pandemic Fund and PPR financing architecture might respond more effectively to the identified challenges.</jats:p

Challenges in international health financing and implications for the new pandemic fund

Background The failures of the international COVID-19 response highlighted key gaps in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The G20 and WHO have called for additional funding of $10.5 billion per year to adequately strengthen the global PPR architecture. In response to these calls, in 2022 the World Bank announced the launch of a new Financial Intermediary Fund (The Pandemic Fund) to catalyse this additional funding. However, there is considerable unclarity regarding the governance makeup and financial modalities of the Pandemic Fund, and divergence of opinion about whether the Fund has been successfully designed to respond to key challenges in global health financing. Methods/Results The article outlines eight challenges associated with global health financing instruments and development aid for health within the global health literature. These include misaligned aid allocation; accountability; multistakeholder representation and participation; country ownership; donor coherency and fragmentation; transparency; power dynamics, and; anti-corruption. Using available information about the Pandemic Fund, the article positions the Pandemic Fund against these challenges to determine in what ways the financing instrument recognizes, addresses, partially addresses, or ignores them. The assessment argues that although the Pandemic Fund has adopted a few measures to recognise and address some of the challenges, overall, the Pandemic Fund has unclear policies in response to most of the challenges while leaving many unaddressed. Conclusion It remains unclear how the Pandemic Fund is explicitly addressing challenges widely recognized in the global health financing literature. Moreover, there is evidence that the Pandemic Fund might be exacerbating these global financing challenges, thus raising questions about its potential efficacy, suitability, and chances of success. In response, this article offers four sets of policy recommendations for how the Pandemic Fund and the PPR financing architecture might respond more effectively to the identified challenges

Developing a Structured Approach to Document Reviews: Lessons From a qualitative study in The Bahamas

This methods case study is an introduction to using document reviews as part of qualitative research. It outlines the advantages and challenges of conducting document reviews and suggests ways to mitigate those challenges. The case details four phases of conducting a document review: (a) finding documents, (b) selecting documents, (c) appraising documents and their content, and (d) synthesizing and analyzing data from documents. Within each phase, practical evidence is provided to support using document reviews in a structured way as a qualitative research method. Readers will learn how to develop and apply a framework for data extraction from documents to answer their own research questions