The end of the article is most telling:
[quote]U.N. agencies, universities and others working on public health routinely take from two to 50 per cent of a donation for “administrative purposes” before it reaches needy countries.
Others said there is little incentive for health officials to commission an independent evaluation to find out what their programs have achieved.
“The public health community has convinced the public the only way to improve poor health in developing countries is by throwing a ton of money at it,” Stevens said. “It is perhaps not coincidental that thousands of highly paid jobs and careers are also dependent on it.”[/quote]
This will probably sound crazy and impractical to most here, but my general view is that health care and health services, if they are to be ethical, must be nonprofit. By that I don’t mean that doctors and health care workers shouldn’t be well paid for their services, but that there should be no shareholders or corporations behind them making a profit for their “investment”. Now I don’t know how much of the world health service stuff is “for profit”, but it is hard to imagine international health services all might be called “nonprofit”. I would guess that many universities or other aid organizations make a profit somehow beyond “administrative costs”. I also realize I’m sort of missing the bigger point of the article, which is that the problem isn’t necessarily that there is a world health aid “industry” per say, but that still costs are inexplicably high. But the issues seem related, so oh well.