A solução para o SUS não é um Brazilcare / The solution to SUS is not a Brazilcare / La solución para el SUS no es uno Brazilcare

O Sistema Único de Saúde brasileiro implantado não recebeu todos os investimentos necessários para alcançar a magnitude prevista desde sua concepção e estabelecida na Constituição Federal de 1988. No mesmo período, o setor privado de saúde brasileiro vem recebendo cada vez mais investimentos por meio das políticas públicas do Estado. A crise econômica e os problemas pelos quais o SUS passa nos dias atuais são usados por determinados atores para justificar uma suposta necessidade de diminuir não só a pressão por financiamento, mas também a demanda de serviços públicos, e apresentar como solução a diminuição do SUS concomitante à expansão do número de pessoas com planos privados de saúde nos moldes da reforma do sistema de saúde norte-americano conhecida como Obamacare. Este artigo apresenta a falácia desse raciocínio com evidências científicas e argumentos que mostram que um maior investimento no SUS é fundamental para o desenvolvimento econômico e social do país.

The Brazilian Sistema Único de Saúde (Unified Health System) in operation has not received all the investments needed to achieve the expected magnitude since its conception and established by Federal Constitution of 1988. In the same period, the health private sector in Brazil has received more and more investments through governmental public policies. The economic crisis and the problems faced by SUS today are used by some actors to justify a pretense necessity of reducing not only the pressure to finance but also the demand for public services, and to present as a solution to such problems a reduction of SUS concomitant with the expansion of people benefiting from private health insurance like those created with reform of the North American health care system known as Obamacare. This article shows the fallacy of reasoning in question through scientific evidences and arguments demonstrating that a greater investmentin SUS is fundamental to economic and social development of Brazil.

El Sistema Único de Salud brasileño implementado no recibió todas las inversiones necesarias para alcanzarla magnitud esperada desde su concepción y establecida en la Constitución Federal de 1988. En el mismo período, el sector privado de salud brasileño ha recibido cada vez más inversiones por el medio de las políticas públicas del Estado. La crisis económica y los problemas por los cuales el SUS ha pasado en los días actuales son utilizados por determinados actores para justificar una supuesta necesidad de reducir no sólo la presión de financiación, sino también la demanda de servicios públicos, y presentar como solución la disminución del SUS concomitantemente a la expansión del número de personas con planes privados de salud en los moldes de la reforma del sistema de salud norteamericano, conocida como Obamacare. Esto artículo presenta la falacia de ese raciocinio con evidencias científicas y argumentos que muestran que una mayor inversión en el SUS es esencial para el desarrollo económico y social del país.

Typology of public outreach for biodiversity conservation projects in Spain.

Conservation education and outreach programs are a key approach to promote public understanding of the importance of biodiversity conservation. We reviewed 85 biodiversity conservation projects supported by the Spanish Ministry of Environment's Biodiversity Foundation. Through content analysis and descriptive statistics, we examined how the projects carried out communication, education, and public awareness and participation (CEPA) actions. We also used multivariate statistical analysis to develop a typology of 4 classes of biodiversity conservation projects on the basis of CEPA implementation. The classifications were delineated by purpose of CEPA, level of integration of CEPA actions, type of CEPA goals, main CEPA stakeholders, and aim of conservation. Our results confirm the existence of 2 key positions: CEPA has intrinsic value (i.e., they supposed the implementation of any CEPA action indirectly supported conservation) and CEPA is an instrument for achieving conservation goals. We also found that most CEPA actions addressed general audiences and school children, ignored minority groups and women, and did not include evaluation. The characteristics of the 4 types of projects and their frequency of implementation in the sample reflect the need for better integration of different types of actions (communication, education, and participation) and improved fostering of participation of multiple stakeholders in developing policy and implementing management strategies.

Equidad e inversión en salud pública de la República del Perú / Equity and investment in the public health system of the Republic of Peru

Introducción La inversión pública del Estado peruano en salud se ha incrementado significativamente en los últimos cinco años. Sin embargo, persisten serios problemas de inequidad en la asignación de los recursos, en la concepción del sistema de inversión y en su gestión. Objetivo Reflexionar entorno a la lógica de la inversión pública en salud que permita brindar oportuna asesoría al Ministerio de Salud del Perú en un intento de lograr la optimización en el uso de los recursos disponibles y un mayor impacto en los principales indicadores sanitarios. Métodos Revisión de documentación institucional del Ministerio de Salud del Perú, de informes de seguimiento y evaluación de proyectos de inversión implementados, entrevistas estructuradas al personal del Ministerio de Salud del Perú y consulta a expertos en inversión pública, políticas sociales y salud pública. Resultados Varias regiones peruanas, entre ellas, Huancavelica y Puno, tienen mayor porcentaje de desnutrición crónica en niños menores de cinco años y mayores tasas de mortalidad infantil, respectivamente, y sin embargo, no son precisamente las que invierten más en salud, a pesar de que en la mayor parte de estas regiones se desarrollan actividades mineras a cargo de empresas transnacionales. Se detectó falta de capacidad de gestión presupuestal y operativa en el personal a cargo del trabajo sobre inversión pública en salud. El Sistema Nacional de Inversión Pública tiene problemas estructurales, entre ellos, desarticulación de la perspectiva sistémica integral, insuficiencia de mecanismos de planificación, seguimiento y evaluación y poca participación de la población destinataria. Conclusiones Para optimizar la inversión pública en salud y alcanzar mejores resultados sanitarios es necesario llevar a cabo una reestructuración técnica y conceptual del Sistema Nacional de Inversión Pública, incorporándole indispensables componentes de eficiencia social, calidad y solidaridad.

Introduction The public investment of the Peruvian state in health care has significantly increased in the last five years. However, there are still serious problems of inequality in terms of allocation of resources, conception of the investment system and management. Objective To make reflections on the logics of the Peruvian public investments in health care that will allow providing adequate advice to the Ministry of Health of Peru, in an attempt to optimize the use of available resources and to have bigger impact on the main health indicators. Methods Review of documents from the Ministry of Health of Peru, of follow-up reports and of the evaluation of implemented investment projects; structured interviews to the staff of that ministry and consultation to experts in public investment, social policies and public health. Results Several Peruvian regions like Huancavelica and Puno have high percentages of chronic malnutrition in under 5 years-old children and higher rates of infant mortality respectively. However, they do not have large investments in the field of health care, despite the mining activities that are developed in these regions in charge of transnational companies. Lack of budget management and operational capacity was detected in the staff responsible for the public investments in health. The National System of Public Investment has structural problems such as breaking up of integrated systemic perspectives, inadequacy of planning, follow-up and evaluation mechanisms, low level of participation of the recipient population and shortage of cross-sectional approaches to investment. Conclusions For the purpose of optimizing the public investments in health and to achieve better results, it is required to carry out technical and conceptual rearrangement of the National Public Investment System by adding indispensable elements of social efficiency, quality and solidarity.