Future scenario-Innovation in Resource use

A large amount of funds raised by the global fund goes to support efforts to address HIV and AIDS. Since all indication shows that vaccines and microbicides are still are long wait, we must then accept the fact that HIV and AIDS will remain a chronic but manageable disease in the foreseeable future. The greatest challenge therefore, will be to maintain the current momentum of raising funds to treat those living with the disease and at the same time undertaking effective prevention measures.

While everyone is keen on the Global Fund developing innovative methods of raising resources needed, few talks of the need to use what we get more efficiently and effectively. One way the GF can do this is by working closely with the pharmaceutical industry. Most of the funds that the GF allocates for treatment go towards purchasing ARVs. After receiving the funds, each country is free to source their drug requirements from any pharmaceutical firm. If for instance, 40% of all the GF resources go to purchase drugs, this amount to billions of dollars. GF can use economies of scale and negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for cheaper prices for drugs. Any pharmaceutical company would be willing to considerably lower prices when they are assured of such a huge sale. This would be particularly enticing to generic producer in India, Brazil and Canada, where there a legislation in place allowing production of cheap generic drugs for the developing countries. The savings would be enormous and the price of ARVs would drop considerably. More people living with the disease would be assured of high quality and safe drugs. This will become even more important in the next 5-10 years as the demand for second line drugs increases. The second line drugs are still out of reach for many people in the developing countries and yet as more people get access to treatment, the need for these drugs goes up. We have seen how the Clinton Foundation has used its clout to negotiate for reduced prices for pediatric drugs. But the GF with the enormous amount of resources at their disposal can do much better in this front. After negotiating and getting the best deal, the countries could then be directed to where they can get the drugs. Hence, if a country sends in a proposal requesting for resources for treatment, the amount required for these drugs is send to the pharmaceutical  company and the country is advised to collect the drugs from the said company.

The greatest challenge may come from the countries themselves. Having been used to getting funds and sourcing the drugs themselves, most country may not be open to the idea of the Fund sourcing the drugs for them. However, this resistance can be eliminated when those against see the efficacy and the benefit of this single sourcing.

The GF may also feel that this is beyond their mandate. However, the Fund cannot remain static and must continuously look for ways of responding to the needs on the ground. Ultimately, the Fund should be guided by the goal of ensuring access to cheap and safe drugs for all those in need.