WHO Faces Cuts to Health Promotion Amid Budget Crisis

Global health leaders warn of dire consequences for crucial initiatives

Health authorities and experts from Australia and around the world are raising urgent concerns over planned reductions to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) health promotion activities. They fear these cutbacks, a direct result of the U.S. administration’s withdrawal of funds, will cripple the WHO’s ability to support vital work in key areas.

Undermining Essential Work

The restructuring and budget reductions are expected to significantly impact the WHO’s capacity to advance initiatives in critical sectors such as the wellbeing economy, planetary health, digital health, Indigenous health, and disaster preparedness. A forthcoming article in the Health Promotion Journal of Australia features endorsements from 14 prominent global health figures. These leaders are calling for the WHO and its member states to ensure the continued existence of a dedicated Department of Health Promotion at the organization’s Geneva headquarters.

A pre-publication version of the journal article describes it as “unfathomable” that the WHO would consider de-prioritizing health promotion at this critical juncture. The authors emphasize the immense stakes involved, stating, “There is simply too much at stake… We are facing multiple health crises, many of which will be reliant on health promotion foundations to seek tangible solutions.” They further urge the WHO to make strategic investments in health promotion across its regional offices, advocating for a corresponding increase in financial commitment from member states to address national and regional health needs.

“The role, function and legitimacy of health promotion within WHO should be elevated, with a parallel increase in resources to address the most urgent health crises facing the world today.”

—Authors of the Health Promotion Journal of Australia article

Call for Increased Investment

Professor James Smith, Global Vice President of Scientific Affairs at the International Union for Health Promotion and Education, highlighted that while the WHO has accomplished significant work, it has historically lacked adequate resourcing for global health promotion efforts. He suggested that the WHO should explore savings in other areas, arguing that health promotion and prevention are already underfunded and present a strong economic case for increased investment.

Professor Smith encouraged health promotion practitioners to advocate for greater WHO resourcing. He also urged the Australian Government to align its investments with the National Preventive Health Strategy and the Closing the Gap Agreement, emphasizing the need for government action and increased public support.

Professor Anna Peeters, CEO of VicHealth and another author of the article, expressed deep concern and disappointment. “The numbers are in, and we know spending money on health promotion now prevents bigger health problems in the future. In Australia, every dollar invested in prevention returns $14 to the system,” she stated. Professor Peeters pointed to the latest WHO report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, which details the extensive work still required to curb tobacco use, a habit that tragically claims seven million lives annually worldwide, as a clear example of what is at risk if global efforts are diminished.

Professor Fran Baum, from Stretton Health Equity, echoed these sentiments, advocating for increased WHO investment in health promotion. She noted that without U.S. influence, the WHO has an opportunity to address commercial threats to health more directly, circumventing past opposition. Professor Baum underscored the critical role of WHO health promotion staff in supporting vital public health initiatives, citing their indispensable support for the Commission on Social Determinants of Health and the influential World Report on the Social Determinants of Health Equity.

Navigating Budgetary Challenges

These concerns arise amidst a significant budgetary crisis at the WHO, precipitated by the withdrawal of funding from the United States, formerly its largest donor. This has led to widespread restructuring and staff reductions across the organization. In May, Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus implemented a significant overhaul, reducing the number of major WHO program divisions. Reports indicate that all six WHO regions are facing substantial cuts, with Geneva headquarters potentially losing nearly a quarter of its annual funding.

Professor Martin McKee, Professor of European Public Health, commented that the WHO leadership is in an unenviable position due to the “reckless policies of the current U.S. Administration.” He added, “Detailed modelling shows that these policies will lead to millions of unnecessary deaths. Dr Tedros has to make many difficult choices so I am hesitant to criticise his decisions… Instead, we should direct our criticism to Washington rather than Geneva.”

Signatories of the impactful journal article represent a range of esteemed institutions, including the Australian Health Promotion Association, the Centre for Health-in-All-Policies Research Translation at the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Queensland University of Technology, Universite de Montreal in Canada, the Health Promotion Forum of New Zealand, The Australian Prevention Partnerships Centre, the Cities Institute at the University of New South Wales, the Heart Foundation, and Curtin School of Public Health.

Director-General Dr Tedros has previously described the WHO’s budget as “extremely modest” given its extensive global operations and the broad mandate entrusted to it by member states.