By CATHERINE MUROMBEDZI
HEALTH CORRESPONDENT
African countries are endowed with vast natural resources, fertile soils, and favorable weather conditions, providing a solid foundation for economic growth and development. However, despite these advantages, the continent’s healthcare systems remain fragile and heavily reliant on donor funding. This vulnerability was exposed when the Trump administration’s aid freeze sparked widespread panic, highlighting the need for African countries to take ownership of their healthcare financing.
The unpredictability of donor funding undermines the ability of African countries to provide essential healthcare services, respond to emergencies, and make progress towards achieving universal health coverage. By investing in their own healthcare systems, African countries can reduce their dependence on external aid, build resilience, and ensure that their citizens have access to quality healthcare services. This requires a concerted effort to mobilise domestic resources, strengthen health systems, and promote innovative financing models.
Investing in health is not only a moral imperative but also a sound economic strategy. A healthy population is more productive, contributes to economic growth, and reduces the burden of healthcare costs on households and governments. African countries must, therefore, prioritise healthcare financing, explore new funding sources, and implement policies that promote universal access to quality healthcare services. By doing so, they can unlock the full potential of their human capital, drive economic development, and build a brighter future for their citizens.
Zimbabwe’s AIDS Levy has been a vital source of funding for HIV and AIDS programmes in the country. The levy is calculated as 3% of the taxable amount, providing a dedicated revenue stream for these initiatives.
However, Minister of Finance Mthuli Ncube acknowledges that this alone is insufficient to cover the funding gap, particularly with the withdrawal of funds from US-backed programmes like PEPFAR.
“We await the review of these cut-offs on the sector. If we are cut off, the country will lose about US$200 million that comes into the country annually for various programmes. But that amount never comes through the budget anyway,” said Ncube.
What is baffling is trivialising the channeling of the US$200m. Whether it was direct or indirect, that amount assisted from drought relief, health to social aspects.
In 2009, the Global Fund (GF) stopped direct funding to Zimbabwe. In 2008, funds meant for the AIDS response had not been accounted for under the central government. The UNDP, thereby became the principal recipient to handle the GF funds. This explains why funds are safe when assistance is indirect.
Innovative revenue methods are needed to be strategically positioned to manage. The poor are already overtaxed with no reprieve in sight.
To address this shortfall, Zimbabwe is exploring alternative revenue streams, including taxes on fast food and sugar. These measures are expected to help cover the funding gap for anti-retroviral drugs and HIV-related services.
With 1.3 million people estimated to be living with HIV in Zimbabwe, relying on donor funds has brought panic to the affected.
Zimbabwe has made substantial progress in combating HIV and AIDS, with 95% of those living with HIV aware of their status, 98% receiving antiretroviral treatment, and 96% achieving suppressed viral loads. To sustain this progress, it’s essential for Zimbabwe to diversify its funding sources and explore innovative financing mechanisms.
Donald Trump’s “America First” approach presents an opportunity for Africa to adopt an “Africa First” perspective, prioritising domestic resource mobilisation to drive development. This strategy enables African nations to invest in critical areas like infrastructure, social services, and human capital development, reducing reliance on external aid.
Historically, US aid to Africa has focused on health initiatives, with approximately 70% of non-humanitarian aid allocated to this sector between 2013 and 2023, primarily targeting HIV/AIDS. However, as African countries take ownership of their development, they must explore innovative financing mechanisms and partnerships to sustain progress and achieve socio-economic growth.
The Africa First Network is one example of an organisation promoting African-led development. They support commercial projects with high impact, from idea to realisation, and facilitate connections between entrepreneurs, investors, and development experts.
By adopting an “Africa First” approach, African nations can unlock their potential, drive economic growth, and achieve sustainable development.
Kwame Nkrumah’s vision for Africa’s development is still relevant today. As the first President of Ghana, advocated for African unity, self-reliance, and economic empowerment. His ideas, though proposed decades ago, remain crucial for Africa’s growth and prosperity.
Nkrumah’s emphasis on domestic resource mobilisation, infrastructure development, and social services is particularly noteworthy. These areas are still critical for Africa’s development, and it’s interesting to see how his ideas are being revisited and reimplemented today.
The current focus on an “Africa First” perspective, prioritising domestic resource mobilisation and investment in strategic areas, is a testament to Nkrumah’s forward-thinking approach. It is “Better late than never.” It would be encouraging to see Africa’s leaders not reinventing the wheel, but building upon Nkrumah’s foundation to build the Africa we all want.
In conclusion, Africa needs to refocus. While conflicts and wars continue to plague various parts of Africa, it’s crucial to prioritise dialogue and peaceful resolution. This allows African nations to shift their focus towards building stronger, more resilient economies and improving the lives of their citizens.
Dialogue and peace are essential prerequisites for sustainable development and prosperity in Africa.
● *Feedback: cathymwauyakufa@gmail.com*
