Key Points
- During the Exemplars study period from 2000 to 2018, and especially after energy companies discovered the offshore Jubilee oilfield in 2007, Ghana’s economy expanded rapidly. In 1995, the World Bank classified Ghana as a low-income country. In 2024, it is a lower-middle-income country with the second largest economy in West Africa.
- The government actively took steps to raise revenues for health, which enabled increased spending. Health spending per capita increased from US$36 in 2000 to US$76 in 2019. Government spending on health as a share of total health expenditure grew from 31% in 2000 to 40% in 2019. During that same period, out-of-pocket spending decreased from half of Ghana’s total share of health expenditure to just over one-third. The investments Ghana made in its health system prioritized improvements in primary health care (PHC) coverage: its universal health care effective coverage index improved from 24% in 2000 to 45% in 2019. This improvement in service coverage has been associated with improvements in population health outcomes. Under-five child mortality declined from 100 to 44 deaths per 1,000 live births between 2000 and 2021, a reduction of about 40%. The maternal mortality ratio also declined, from 484 to 308 per 100,000 live births between 2000 and 2017, a 36% reduction.
- Although Ghana’s economy has grown, the poverty rate has remained high—almost one-quarter of the population was poor in 2017—and the need for social services like health care is significant. Consequently, Ghana aimed to improve coverage equitably by increasing access to PHC nationwide—for example, by investing in a comprehensive National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) and innovating ways to deliver key PHC services close to the communities where people live via the Community-Based Health Planning and Services (CHPS) intervention. These interventions reduced coverage gaps between the poorest and richest population groups. It increased coverage for the lowest quintile by 25% and reduced inequality in coverage between the poorest and richest quintiles by 17% between 1998 and 2017.
Health system efficiency and primary health care As a 2010 World Health Organization (WHO) paper explains, efficiency in health systems refers to “attaining the highest level of health possible with the available resources.”1 That means allocating available resources as thoughtfully as possible; it also means minimizing wasted resources.2 (According to that report, as much as 40% of health spending was wasted each year.)1 Worldwide, health spending has increased enormously over the past two decades. According to the 2019 WHO report Global Spending on Health: A World in Transition, as countries get richer, their citizens demand more and better health care. At the same time, health services got more expensive, driving up spending almost everywhere.3 The COVID-19 pandemic led to an even more dramatic uptick in global total spending on health.4 However, according to the World Bank, health spending has contracted since 2022: in dozens of developing countries, share of government spending fell below 2019 levels.5 Moreover, in recent years policymakers worldwide have begun to focus less on spending more, and more on spending more efficiently.6 (In fact, evidence shows that simply spending more can reduce efficiency if funds are misallocated.)7,8 Researchers believe reducing health system inefficiency yields better health outcomes: for example, a 2013 International Monetary Fund report estimated that African countries could improve life expectancy up to five years if they followed best practices for improving efficiency.6 At the same time, health systems that demonstrate good stewardship of resources can unlock additional funds from donors.9 Studies show that primary health care is an efficient investment in health systems.9 One reason is that many health needs can be prevented or addressed at the PHC level, improving outcomes and reducing costly spending on specialists and hospitals. Coordinated, continuous PHC that emphasizes prevention and early intervention at the community level is not cheap, but scholars argue it enables health systems to provide more and better care—improving output as well as outcomes—for each dollar spent.10,11 |
Improving health system efficiency in Ghana
Charting a country’s performance on the universal health coverage (UHC) effective coverage index against the amount it spends on health care (measured by total health expenditure) over time is one way to measure health system efficiency. The effective coverage index is a composite measure of primary health system performance reflecting service coverage across a range of health services—including prevention, promotion, treatment, rehabilitation, and palliative care—and across the life course; it also reflects the need for health services, the use of health services, and the quality of health services.12,13
We selected Exemplar countries by benchmarking country performance against an optimal possible output—the “frontier”—which is the modeled, maximum effective coverage a country could attain at a given level of spending, in addition to other factors. This method of econometric analysis demonstrates how close a country is to the maximum possible output it could achieve with its money, by charting its health system’s improvement over time. This optimal production framing implies an underlying assumption about the relationship between investment and output—there is only so much health a country can achieve at a given level of spending. Once a country has hit the frontier, it must invest more resources if it seeks to achieve greater gains in health system performance.
As Figure 1 shows, Ghana had a rising effective coverage index compared with its total health expenditure per capita. The country improved its UHC effective coverage from an index score (0–100) of about 40 in 2000 to 49 in 2018.
Figure 1: UHC Effective Coverage Relative to Total Health Expenditure per capita
Analysis of PHC indicator data shows that with these efficiency improvements, Ghana has improved the overall coverage of the population with PHC services such as immunization and antenatal care visits for pregnant women (Figure 2).

Ghana has simultaneously increased its domestic spending on health. Health spending per capita increased from US$36 in 2000 to US$76 in 2019, and government spending on health as a share of total health expenditure grew from 31% in 2000 to 40% in 2019. Estimates on how much of that total expenditure goes to PHC ranges from 45% to 79%.14,15
Figure 2: Ghana coverage indicators over time
Improvements in population health outcomes have accompanied these improvements in service coverage. Ghana has also made great strides on key health outcome indicators such as maternal and child mortality (Figure 3). Under-five child mortality declined from 101 to 56 deaths per 1,000 live births between 2000 and 2017, a reduction of about 44%. The maternal mortality ratio also declined, from 499 to 274 per 100,000 live births between 2000 and 2017, a 45% reduction (Figure 3). As Figure 4 shows, the country has also made significant progress in reducing overall population disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).
Figure 3: Ghana health outcomes over time
Figure 4: DALY rates
Health system equity and primary health care According to the World Health Organization, “health equity is achieved when everyone can attain their full potential for health and well-being.”16 An equitable health system is one that protects its most vulnerable users and eliminates disparities in access and outcomes between different groups of people. Researchers argue that although it is not a low-cost strategy, PHC is among the most valuable tools for achieving health equity worldwide.17,18 It improves access to health services on the supply side as well as on the demand side (for instance, by reducing geographic and financial barriers so people can seek and obtain the care they need). Likewise, because it has the potential to reduce hospital admissions and costly emergencies through preventive care and timely diagnosis, PHC can both keep people healthier and protect them from catastrophic health expenditures. |
Improving health system equity in Ghana
During the Exemplars study period from 2000 to 2018, Ghana adopted a series of reforms that were specifically aimed at reducing health inequalities. Interventions like the National Health Insurance Scheme made PHC services more affordable to all Ghanaians.
Other health system interventions worked together to produce more equitable outputs and outcomes. Innovations like the Community Health and Family Planning Project brought PHC services closer to geographically isolated communities.
Evidence shows that these efforts to improve health system equity reduced coverage gaps between the poorest and richest population groups. For example, as Figure 5 shows, between 1996 and 2020, Ghana increased PHC coverage for the lowest quintile by 27% and reduced inequality in coverage between poorest and richest wealth quintiles by 11%.
Figure 5: PHC coverage by income quintile
Health system equity and financial protection According to the World Bank, out-of-pocket spending is any direct payment by households to health practitioners, suppliers of pharmaceuticals, and any other supplier of therapeutic goods and services. Because individuals must pay for out-of-pocket spending, it can threaten their financial security. For poor people, this spending can be catastrophic. |
Financial risk protection policies safeguard individuals from health care costs that may impoverish them, remove barriers to PHC access, and increase health care utilization. In Ghana, interventions like the National Health Insurance Scheme, free maternity care policies, and the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) program aimed to make it easier and more affordable for people nationwide—and especially the country’s poorest and most vulnerable citizens—to obtain key health services.
Earlier policies in Ghana implemented a “cash-and-carry” system in which individuals paid for services prior to receiving care. However, this worsened access to care for the poor, and it was abolished at the turn of the 21st century. As Figure 6 shows, out-of -pocket spending as a proportion of current health expenditure has dropped considerably, from more than 50% in 2000 to less than 30% in 2020.
Figure 6: Out-of-pocket spending as a share of current health expenditure
During the same period, as Figure 7 shows, researchers also recorded a reduction in catastrophic spending, as measured by the proportion of household expenditures on health greater than 10% of total household expenditure or income (Sustainable Development Goal 3.8.2).19 The threat of catastrophic health spending weighs most heavily on the poorest people with the least money to spare. Between 1991 and 2016, the number of Ghanaian households in this category fell by nearly 80%.
Figure 7: Catastrophic health spending: Population with household expenditures on health greater than 10% of total household expenditure or income (SDG 3.8.2)
-
1
Chisholm D, Evans DB. Improving Health System Efficiency as a Means of Moving Towards Universal Coverage. World Health Report (2010) Background Paper 28. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/health-financing/technical-briefs-background-papers/whr-2010-background-paper-28.pdf
-
2
Bose B. A Guide to Assessing the Efficiency of Health Systems. Presented at: Webinar Series on Health Systems Assessment, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; September 30, 2021. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2216/2022/01/Webinar-8_Efficiency.pdf
-
3
World Health Organization (WHO). Global Spending on Health: A World in Transition. Geneva: WHO; 2019. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-HIS-HGF-HFWorkingPaper-19.4
-
4
World Health Organization (WHO). Global Spending on Health: Rising to the Pandemic's Challenges. Geneva: WHO; 2022. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240064911
-
5
Kurowski C, Kumar A, Mieses Ramirez JC, Schmidt M, Silfverberg DV. Health Financing in a Time of Global Shocks: Strong Advance, Early Retreat. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2023. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/health/publication/from-double-shock-to-double-recovery-health-financing-in-the-time-of-covid-19
-
6
Garcia-Escribano M, Juarros P, Mogues T. Patterns and Drivers of Health Spending Efficiency. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund; 2022. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2022/03/04/Patterns-and-Drivers-of-Health-Spending-Efficiency-513694
-
7
Zhao Z, Dong S, Wang J, Jiang Q. Estimating the efficiency of primary health care services and its determinants: evidence from provincial panel data in China. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1173197. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1173197
-
8
Grigoli F, Kapsoli J. Waste not, want not: the efficiency of health expenditure in emerging and developing economies. Rev Dev Econ. 2018;22(1):384-403. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12346
-
9
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Realising the Potential of Primary Health Care. Paris: OECD; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1787/a92adee4-en
-
10
van Weel C, Kidd MR. Why strengthening primary health care is essential to achieving universal health coverage. CMAJ. 2018;190(15):e463-e466. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.170784
-
11
Cumper G. The costs of primary health care. Trop Doct. 1984;14(1):19-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/004947558401400113
-
12
Lozano R, Fullman N, Mumford JE, et al; Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019 Universal Health Coverage Collaborators. Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1250-1284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30750-9
-
13
Ng M, Fullman N, Dieleman JL, Flaxman AD, Murray CJ, Lim SS. Effective coverage: a metric for monitoring universal health coverage. PLoS Med. 2014;11(9):e1001730. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001730
-
14
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). Low- and Middle-Income Country Primary Health Care Expenditures 2000-2017. Seattle: IHME; 2021. Accessed October 3, 2024. https://ghdx.healthdata.org/record/ihme-data/low-and-middle-income-country-primary-health-care-expenditures-2000-2017
-
15
World Health Organization. NHA indicators. Global Health Expenditure Database. Accessed October 3, 2024. https://apps.who.int/nha/database/ViewData/Indicators/en
-
16
World Health Organization. Health equity. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.who.int/health-topics/health-equity
-
17
Pan American Health Organization. Primary health care. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.paho.org/en/topics/primary-health-care
-
18
Shi L. The impact of primary care: a focused review. Scientifica (Cairo). 2012;2012:432892. https://doi.org/10.6064/2012/432892
-
19
World Health Organization. Population with household expenditures on health greater than 10% of total household expenditure or income (SDG 3.8.2) (%, national, rural, urban). Global Health Observatory. Last updated June 20, 2023. Accessed September 24, 2024. https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/indicators/indicator-details/GHO/population-with-household-expenditures-on-health-greater-than-10-of-total-household-expenditure-or-income-(sdg-3-8-2)-(-)