What level of co-investment in education from HIV budgets could be justified, in view of the benefits against HIV?
In this correspondence article, the authors argue that secondary education is a sound economic investment in its own right, but remains resource-constrained in many low-income and middle-income countries. Therefore, the relevant question is what level of co-investment in education from HIV budgets could be justified, in view of the benefits against HIV?
They state that if the parties interested in HIV prevention contributed to educational funding up to the value of their next best investment (in this case, male circumcision), further schooling expansion could be achieved. With the threshold of $1,096 per infection averted, these researchers show that HIV budgets could contribute up to 4% of total costs for an additional year of secondary schooling.
This work is supported by the Department for International Development’s STRIVE Programme which is led by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)
Remme, M.; Watts, C.; Heise, L.; Vassall, A. Secondary schooling might be as good an HIV investment as male circumcision. Lancet Global Health (2015) 3 (10) e591. [DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(15)00167-9]