11:12 am, Friday, 10 October 2025
BREAKING NEWS
Reviving the Rural Economy: $100 Million ADB–Bangladesh Agreement The Journey Begins for Cox’s Bazar’s First Plastic Recycling Plant Why the world’s biggest food company is stepping back Nestlé has withdrawn from a high-profile international alliance to cut methane from dairy supply chains, a move that instantly sharpened debate over how fast and by what methods the sector should decarbonize; the company says it will keep pursuing on-farm emissions cuts through its own programs while reassessing the group’s approach and governance, but the exit deprives the coalition of its most recognizable member and risks slowing peer benchmarking, shared pilot data, and pooled purchasing that can bring down costs for farmers. Methane from cattle is a potent, short-lived climate pollutant, and many governments have leaned on voluntary industry compacts to accelerate adoption of feed additives, manure management, and breeding strategies; critics of Nestlé’s decision warn that a fragmentation of efforts could reduce transparency and make it harder for buyers, lenders, and regulators to compare progress across brands, whereas supporters counter that company-led projects tied to local agronomy and subsidies often deliver faster, measurable gains than broad global charters. The policy backdrop is shifting as well: several markets are moving from pure carrots to a mix of incentives and performance-based conditions on grants and export supports, and that pivot raises stakes for how milk processors document emissions baselines and third-party verification, because the credibility of Scope 3 targets rests on comparable methodologies rather than marketing claims alone. Practically, much of the abatement economics hinge on who pays for early-stage inputs like methane-reducing feed supplements and slurry lids; with farm margins tight, a coordinated model—blending buyer premiums, public cost-shares, and green-finance instruments—is usually needed to avoid penalizing smaller producers, and Nestlé’s departure complicates the coalition’s ability to aggregate demand and negotiate lower unit costs at scale. What changes on the farm, for financiers, and across supply chains For producers, the near-term signal is mixed: one major buyer is still funding on-farm pilots but no longer inside the alliance’s shared roadmap, which could slow knowledge transfer between regions that differ on climate, feed, and herd structure, even as individual Nestlé programs continue to trial seaweed-based additives, nitrification inhibitors, covered lagoons with biogas capture, and pasture rotations to improve enteric and manure outcomes; in parallel, veterinarians and breeders stress that fertility and animal health gains can cut emissions intensity without shrinking output, though activists argue absolute reductions are needed if national targets are to be met. Financiers and insurers will keep pressing for comparable disclosures because the cost of capital increasingly reflects climate-risk metrics: banks baking “sustainability-linked” terms into dairy loans need clear, auditable KPIs, and exporters eyeing tariff-free access to markets with carbon-border rules will face tougher paperwork if standards splinter, which is why industry groups are urging a minimum common MRV (measurement-reporting-verification) framework even when brand strategies differ. For consumers—and for downstream brands in chocolate, infant formula, and ice cream—the implications will show up more in labels and price architecture than in the taste of products: if buyers pay farmers for verified methane abatement while feed and equipment remain pricey, some costs may pass through, but over time biogas revenue, fertilizer substitution, and efficiency gains can offset outlays and stabilize retail pricing. The political risk is that today’s corporate exit becomes tomorrow’s cultural flashpoint, especially in countries where farmer protests have already shaped election cycles; to avoid backlash, climate policy designers are experimenting with “pay for performance” that rewards measured reductions rather than prescribing a single technology path. The bottom line is not that dairy decarbonization stalls, but that governance gets messier: Nestlé’s solo track keeps momentum on pilots yet raises coordination costs for everyone else, and the outcome to watch is whether competing alliances converge on interoperable data, verification, and crediting rules so that farmers can sell a ton of avoided methane once—and get recognized for it across buyers, banks, and border regimes. SOFTBANK BUYS ABB’S ROBOTICS UNIT FOR $5.4B, BETTING ON A NEW WAVE OF FACTORY AUTOMATION Nurul Majid Humayun’s Death and the Placement of Prisons under the International Red Cross IEA TRIMS U.S. RENEWABLES OUTLOOK AS FEDERAL POLICIES SHIFT; GLOBAL SOLAR STILL SURGES GAZA TALKS ENTER DAY THREE IN EGYPT AS MEDIATORS TEST PATH TO FULL CEASE-FIRE OCTOBER PRIME DAY 2025: THE TECH DEALS THAT ARE ACTUALLY WORTH YOUR MONEY PRIME DAY, AGAIN: WIRED’S BIG LIST SHOWS HOW TO SHOP SMART AND SKIP THE DUDS TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET TEASES ‘MARTY SUPREME’ AFTER NYFF PREMIERE, KEEPING PLOT UNDER WRAPS
Home / Bangladesh, Health, Top News

Strengthening TB Public-Private Mix for Enhanced Policy Advocacy and Private Sector Engagement

Sarakhon Desk

Dhaka, Bangladesh, 04 June 2024: icddr,b, in collaboration with the National Tuberculosis Control Programme (NTP) and The Stop TB Partnership, hosted an event titled “Strengthening TB Public-Private Mix for Enhanced Policy Advocacy and Private Sector Engagement” at the Sasakawa Auditorium, icddr,b, Mohakhali, Dhaka. This initiative aimed to enhance policy advocacy and engage the private sector in Bangladesh’s national effort to combat tuberculosis (TB).


The Public-Private Mix (PPM) is essential in harnessing the strengths of both sectors to increase TB diagnosis and treatment coverage in Bangladesh. By involving private healthcare providers, more people can be reached with timely and effective TB care. PPM strategies ensure that high-quality TB services are available to everyone, regardless of where they seek care. Engaging the private sector also helps to leverage additional resources and innovations that can enhance TB control efforts. A well-coordinated PPM approach can improve case detection rates and ensure better treatment outcomes.
In his welcome remarks, icddr,b’s Executive Director, Dr Tahmeed Ahmed, highlighted icddr,b’s pivotal role in TB research in Bangladesh and its contributions to informing and shaping national policies and guidelines that have driven progress in TB control in the country. He said, “The extent of tuberculosis in Bangladesh cannot be addressed by the government alone. The private sector also needs to come forward and collaborate through public-private partnerships. One example is the network established by icddr,b, which includes public and private doctors and pharmacy owners. Through this network, patients suffering from a chronic cough are referred to TB centres run by icddr,b, where TB diagnosis is done rapidly using state-of-the-art GeneXpert technology.”

An audio-visual presentation titled “Journey to Cure: Private Sector Involvement in Battling Tuberculosis in Bangladesh” showcased the critical role of private sector engagement in combating TB, illustrating successful collaborations and their impacts on TB control efforts. A detailed presentation on “Addressing Public-Private Mix Policy Advocacy in Bangladesh” provided insights into the current policy landscape, challenges, and opportunities for enhancing the PPM approach in TB control.
In a plenary session, TB PPM stakeholders discussed the collective responsibility of public and private partners in combating TB, sharing best practices, and identifying actionable steps to strengthen PPM initiatives. Dr Md. Mahafuzer Rahman Sarker, Line Director, TB-L & ASP, emphasised the importance of sustained collaboration between public and private sectors to achieve national End TB goals.
Miranda Beckman, Deputy Office Director, OPHN, USAID Bangladesh, highlighted USAID’s commitment to supporting Bangladesh’s TB control efforts and the need for innovative approaches to engage the private sector.

Prof. Dr Meerjady Sabrina Flora, ADG (Planning and Development), DGHS, underscored the strategic importance of policy advocacy and the integration of private sector initiatives into national TB programmes.
Mr Md. Shamsul Hoque Tuku, MP, Deputy Speaker of the Bangladesh National Parliament, graced the event as the Chief Guest. In his remarks, he said, “The fight against diseases like tuberculosis requires social movements. In this social movement, the role of government, private institutions, and health organisations is very important. The ‘Parliamentary TB Caucus’ has already been formed by members of the Bangladesh National Parliament. This parliamentary platform is committed to bringing forward the relevant issues to fight TB at the highest levels of government. I believe that through the united cooperation of all, we will defeat TB.”
Dr Sayera Banu, Senior Scientist & Head of PEI, IDD, icddr,b, expressed her gratitude to all participants, stakeholders, and partners for their dedication and contributions towards the shared mission to end TB in Bangladesh.

The event highlighted the need for enhanced policy advocacy to engage the private sector in the country’s fight against TB. Collaborative efforts among the government, NGOs, and the private sector can lead to enhanced capacity and resource sharing, increased access to TB care, and better service delivery to the beneficiaries.

More News:
The Journey Begins for Cox’s Bazar’s First Plastic Recycling Plant
Why the world’s biggest food company is stepping back Nestlé has withdrawn from a high-profile international alliance to cut methane from dairy supply chains, a move that instantly sharpened debate over how fast and by what methods the sector should decarbonize; the company says it will keep pursuing on-farm emissions cuts through its own programs while reassessing the group’s approach and governance, but the exit deprives the coalition of its most recognizable member and risks slowing peer benchmarking, shared pilot data, and pooled purchasing that can bring down costs for farmers. Methane from cattle is a potent, short-lived climate pollutant, and many governments have leaned on voluntary industry compacts to accelerate adoption of feed additives, manure management, and breeding strategies; critics of Nestlé’s decision warn that a fragmentation of efforts could reduce transparency and make it harder for buyers, lenders, and regulators to compare progress across brands, whereas supporters counter that company-led projects tied to local agronomy and subsidies often deliver faster, measurable gains than broad global charters. The policy backdrop is shifting as well: several markets are moving from pure carrots to a mix of incentives and performance-based conditions on grants and export supports, and that pivot raises stakes for how milk processors document emissions baselines and third-party verification, because the credibility of Scope 3 targets rests on comparable methodologies rather than marketing claims alone. Practically, much of the abatement economics hinge on who pays for early-stage inputs like methane-reducing feed supplements and slurry lids; with farm margins tight, a coordinated model—blending buyer premiums, public cost-shares, and green-finance instruments—is usually needed to avoid penalizing smaller producers, and Nestlé’s departure complicates the coalition’s ability to aggregate demand and negotiate lower unit costs at scale. What changes on the farm, for financiers, and across supply chains For producers, the near-term signal is mixed: one major buyer is still funding on-farm pilots but no longer inside the alliance’s shared roadmap, which could slow knowledge transfer between regions that differ on climate, feed, and herd structure, even as individual Nestlé programs continue to trial seaweed-based additives, nitrification inhibitors, covered lagoons with biogas capture, and pasture rotations to improve enteric and manure outcomes; in parallel, veterinarians and breeders stress that fertility and animal health gains can cut emissions intensity without shrinking output, though activists argue absolute reductions are needed if national targets are to be met. Financiers and insurers will keep pressing for comparable disclosures because the cost of capital increasingly reflects climate-risk metrics: banks baking “sustainability-linked” terms into dairy loans need clear, auditable KPIs, and exporters eyeing tariff-free access to markets with carbon-border rules will face tougher paperwork if standards splinter, which is why industry groups are urging a minimum common MRV (measurement-reporting-verification) framework even when brand strategies differ. For consumers—and for downstream brands in chocolate, infant formula, and ice cream—the implications will show up more in labels and price architecture than in the taste of products: if buyers pay farmers for verified methane abatement while feed and equipment remain pricey, some costs may pass through, but over time biogas revenue, fertilizer substitution, and efficiency gains can offset outlays and stabilize retail pricing. The political risk is that today’s corporate exit becomes tomorrow’s cultural flashpoint, especially in countries where farmer protests have already shaped election cycles; to avoid backlash, climate policy designers are experimenting with “pay for performance” that rewards measured reductions rather than prescribing a single technology path. The bottom line is not that dairy decarbonization stalls, but that governance gets messier: Nestlé’s solo track keeps momentum on pilots yet raises coordination costs for everyone else, and the outcome to watch is whether competing alliances converge on interoperable data, verification, and crediting rules so that farmers can sell a ton of avoided methane once—and get recognized for it across buyers, banks, and border regimes.
SOFTBANK BUYS ABB’S ROBOTICS UNIT FOR $5.4B, BETTING ON A NEW WAVE OF FACTORY AUTOMATION
Nurul Majid Humayun’s Death and the Placement of Prisons under the International Red Cross
IEA TRIMS U.S. RENEWABLES OUTLOOK AS FEDERAL POLICIES SHIFT; GLOBAL SOLAR STILL SURGES
GAZA TALKS ENTER DAY THREE IN EGYPT AS MEDIATORS TEST PATH TO FULL CEASE-FIRE
03:07:03 pm, Monday, 1 July 2024

Reviving the Rural Economy: $100 Million ADB–Bangladesh Agreement

The Journey Begins for Cox’s Bazar’s First Plastic Recycling Plant

Why the world’s biggest food company is stepping back Nestlé has withdrawn from a high-profile international alliance to cut methane from dairy supply chains, a move that instantly sharpened debate over how fast and by what methods the sector should decarbonize; the company says it will keep pursuing on-farm emissions cuts through its own programs while reassessing the group’s approach and governance, but the exit deprives the coalition of its most recognizable member and risks slowing peer benchmarking, shared pilot data, and pooled purchasing that can bring down costs for farmers. Methane from cattle is a potent, short-lived climate pollutant, and many governments have leaned on voluntary industry compacts to accelerate adoption of feed additives, manure management, and breeding strategies; critics of Nestlé’s decision warn that a fragmentation of efforts could reduce transparency and make it harder for buyers, lenders, and regulators to compare progress across brands, whereas supporters counter that company-led projects tied to local agronomy and subsidies often deliver faster, measurable gains than broad global charters. The policy backdrop is shifting as well: several markets are moving from pure carrots to a mix of incentives and performance-based conditions on grants and export supports, and that pivot raises stakes for how milk processors document emissions baselines and third-party verification, because the credibility of Scope 3 targets rests on comparable methodologies rather than marketing claims alone. Practically, much of the abatement economics hinge on who pays for early-stage inputs like methane-reducing feed supplements and slurry lids; with farm margins tight, a coordinated model—blending buyer premiums, public cost-shares, and green-finance instruments—is usually needed to avoid penalizing smaller producers, and Nestlé’s departure complicates the coalition’s ability to aggregate demand and negotiate lower unit costs at scale. What changes on the farm, for financiers, and across supply chains For producers, the near-term signal is mixed: one major buyer is still funding on-farm pilots but no longer inside the alliance’s shared roadmap, which could slow knowledge transfer between regions that differ on climate, feed, and herd structure, even as individual Nestlé programs continue to trial seaweed-based additives, nitrification inhibitors, covered lagoons with biogas capture, and pasture rotations to improve enteric and manure outcomes; in parallel, veterinarians and breeders stress that fertility and animal health gains can cut emissions intensity without shrinking output, though activists argue absolute reductions are needed if national targets are to be met. Financiers and insurers will keep pressing for comparable disclosures because the cost of capital increasingly reflects climate-risk metrics: banks baking “sustainability-linked” terms into dairy loans need clear, auditable KPIs, and exporters eyeing tariff-free access to markets with carbon-border rules will face tougher paperwork if standards splinter, which is why industry groups are urging a minimum common MRV (measurement-reporting-verification) framework even when brand strategies differ. For consumers—and for downstream brands in chocolate, infant formula, and ice cream—the implications will show up more in labels and price architecture than in the taste of products: if buyers pay farmers for verified methane abatement while feed and equipment remain pricey, some costs may pass through, but over time biogas revenue, fertilizer substitution, and efficiency gains can offset outlays and stabilize retail pricing. The political risk is that today’s corporate exit becomes tomorrow’s cultural flashpoint, especially in countries where farmer protests have already shaped election cycles; to avoid backlash, climate policy designers are experimenting with “pay for performance” that rewards measured reductions rather than prescribing a single technology path. The bottom line is not that dairy decarbonization stalls, but that governance gets messier: Nestlé’s solo track keeps momentum on pilots yet raises coordination costs for everyone else, and the outcome to watch is whether competing alliances converge on interoperable data, verification, and crediting rules so that farmers can sell a ton of avoided methane once—and get recognized for it across buyers, banks, and border regimes.

SOFTBANK BUYS ABB’S ROBOTICS UNIT FOR $5.4B, BETTING ON A NEW WAVE OF FACTORY AUTOMATION

Nurul Majid Humayun’s Death and the Placement of Prisons under the International Red Cross

IEA TRIMS U.S. RENEWABLES OUTLOOK AS FEDERAL POLICIES SHIFT; GLOBAL SOLAR STILL SURGES

GAZA TALKS ENTER DAY THREE IN EGYPT AS MEDIATORS TEST PATH TO FULL CEASE-FIRE

OCTOBER PRIME DAY 2025: THE TECH DEALS THAT ARE ACTUALLY WORTH YOUR MONEY

PRIME DAY, AGAIN: WIRED’S BIG LIST SHOWS HOW TO SHOP SMART AND SKIP THE DUDS

TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET TEASES ‘MARTY SUPREME’ AFTER NYFF PREMIERE, KEEPING PLOT UNDER WRAPS

News Title :
Reviving the Rural Economy: $100 Million ADB–Bangladesh Agreement The Journey Begins for Cox’s Bazar’s First Plastic Recycling Plant Why the world’s biggest food company is stepping back Nestlé has withdrawn from a high-profile international alliance to cut methane from dairy supply chains, a move that instantly sharpened debate over how fast and by what methods the sector should decarbonize; the company says it will keep pursuing on-farm emissions cuts through its own programs while reassessing the group’s approach and governance, but the exit deprives the coalition of its most recognizable member and risks slowing peer benchmarking, shared pilot data, and pooled purchasing that can bring down costs for farmers. Methane from cattle is a potent, short-lived climate pollutant, and many governments have leaned on voluntary industry compacts to accelerate adoption of feed additives, manure management, and breeding strategies; critics of Nestlé’s decision warn that a fragmentation of efforts could reduce transparency and make it harder for buyers, lenders, and regulators to compare progress across brands, whereas supporters counter that company-led projects tied to local agronomy and subsidies often deliver faster, measurable gains than broad global charters. The policy backdrop is shifting as well: several markets are moving from pure carrots to a mix of incentives and performance-based conditions on grants and export supports, and that pivot raises stakes for how milk processors document emissions baselines and third-party verification, because the credibility of Scope 3 targets rests on comparable methodologies rather than marketing claims alone. Practically, much of the abatement economics hinge on who pays for early-stage inputs like methane-reducing feed supplements and slurry lids; with farm margins tight, a coordinated model—blending buyer premiums, public cost-shares, and green-finance instruments—is usually needed to avoid penalizing smaller producers, and Nestlé’s departure complicates the coalition’s ability to aggregate demand and negotiate lower unit costs at scale. What changes on the farm, for financiers, and across supply chains For producers, the near-term signal is mixed: one major buyer is still funding on-farm pilots but no longer inside the alliance’s shared roadmap, which could slow knowledge transfer between regions that differ on climate, feed, and herd structure, even as individual Nestlé programs continue to trial seaweed-based additives, nitrification inhibitors, covered lagoons with biogas capture, and pasture rotations to improve enteric and manure outcomes; in parallel, veterinarians and breeders stress that fertility and animal health gains can cut emissions intensity without shrinking output, though activists argue absolute reductions are needed if national targets are to be met. Financiers and insurers will keep pressing for comparable disclosures because the cost of capital increasingly reflects climate-risk metrics: banks baking “sustainability-linked” terms into dairy loans need clear, auditable KPIs, and exporters eyeing tariff-free access to markets with carbon-border rules will face tougher paperwork if standards splinter, which is why industry groups are urging a minimum common MRV (measurement-reporting-verification) framework even when brand strategies differ. For consumers—and for downstream brands in chocolate, infant formula, and ice cream—the implications will show up more in labels and price architecture than in the taste of products: if buyers pay farmers for verified methane abatement while feed and equipment remain pricey, some costs may pass through, but over time biogas revenue, fertilizer substitution, and efficiency gains can offset outlays and stabilize retail pricing. The political risk is that today’s corporate exit becomes tomorrow’s cultural flashpoint, especially in countries where farmer protests have already shaped election cycles; to avoid backlash, climate policy designers are experimenting with “pay for performance” that rewards measured reductions rather than prescribing a single technology path. The bottom line is not that dairy decarbonization stalls, but that governance gets messier: Nestlé’s solo track keeps momentum on pilots yet raises coordination costs for everyone else, and the outcome to watch is whether competing alliances converge on interoperable data, verification, and crediting rules so that farmers can sell a ton of avoided methane once—and get recognized for it across buyers, banks, and border regimes. SOFTBANK BUYS ABB’S ROBOTICS UNIT FOR $5.4B, BETTING ON A NEW WAVE OF FACTORY AUTOMATION Nurul Majid Humayun’s Death and the Placement of Prisons under the International Red Cross IEA TRIMS U.S. RENEWABLES OUTLOOK AS FEDERAL POLICIES SHIFT; GLOBAL SOLAR STILL SURGES GAZA TALKS ENTER DAY THREE IN EGYPT AS MEDIATORS TEST PATH TO FULL CEASE-FIRE OCTOBER PRIME DAY 2025: THE TECH DEALS THAT ARE ACTUALLY WORTH YOUR MONEY PRIME DAY, AGAIN: WIRED’S BIG LIST SHOWS HOW TO SHOP SMART AND SKIP THE DUDS TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET TEASES ‘MARTY SUPREME’ AFTER NYFF PREMIERE, KEEPING PLOT UNDER WRAPS

Strengthening TB Public-Private Mix for Enhanced Policy Advocacy and Private Sector Engagement

03:07:03 pm, Monday, 1 July 2024

Dhaka, Bangladesh, 04 June 2024: icddr,b, in collaboration with the National Tuberculosis Control Programme (NTP) and The Stop TB Partnership, hosted an event titled “Strengthening TB Public-Private Mix for Enhanced Policy Advocacy and Private Sector Engagement” at the Sasakawa Auditorium, icddr,b, Mohakhali, Dhaka. This initiative aimed to enhance policy advocacy and engage the private sector in Bangladesh’s national effort to combat tuberculosis (TB).


The Public-Private Mix (PPM) is essential in harnessing the strengths of both sectors to increase TB diagnosis and treatment coverage in Bangladesh. By involving private healthcare providers, more people can be reached with timely and effective TB care. PPM strategies ensure that high-quality TB services are available to everyone, regardless of where they seek care. Engaging the private sector also helps to leverage additional resources and innovations that can enhance TB control efforts. A well-coordinated PPM approach can improve case detection rates and ensure better treatment outcomes.
In his welcome remarks, icddr,b’s Executive Director, Dr Tahmeed Ahmed, highlighted icddr,b’s pivotal role in TB research in Bangladesh and its contributions to informing and shaping national policies and guidelines that have driven progress in TB control in the country. He said, “The extent of tuberculosis in Bangladesh cannot be addressed by the government alone. The private sector also needs to come forward and collaborate through public-private partnerships. One example is the network established by icddr,b, which includes public and private doctors and pharmacy owners. Through this network, patients suffering from a chronic cough are referred to TB centres run by icddr,b, where TB diagnosis is done rapidly using state-of-the-art GeneXpert technology.”

An audio-visual presentation titled “Journey to Cure: Private Sector Involvement in Battling Tuberculosis in Bangladesh” showcased the critical role of private sector engagement in combating TB, illustrating successful collaborations and their impacts on TB control efforts. A detailed presentation on “Addressing Public-Private Mix Policy Advocacy in Bangladesh” provided insights into the current policy landscape, challenges, and opportunities for enhancing the PPM approach in TB control.
In a plenary session, TB PPM stakeholders discussed the collective responsibility of public and private partners in combating TB, sharing best practices, and identifying actionable steps to strengthen PPM initiatives. Dr Md. Mahafuzer Rahman Sarker, Line Director, TB-L & ASP, emphasised the importance of sustained collaboration between public and private sectors to achieve national End TB goals.
Miranda Beckman, Deputy Office Director, OPHN, USAID Bangladesh, highlighted USAID’s commitment to supporting Bangladesh’s TB control efforts and the need for innovative approaches to engage the private sector.

Prof. Dr Meerjady Sabrina Flora, ADG (Planning and Development), DGHS, underscored the strategic importance of policy advocacy and the integration of private sector initiatives into national TB programmes.
Mr Md. Shamsul Hoque Tuku, MP, Deputy Speaker of the Bangladesh National Parliament, graced the event as the Chief Guest. In his remarks, he said, “The fight against diseases like tuberculosis requires social movements. In this social movement, the role of government, private institutions, and health organisations is very important. The ‘Parliamentary TB Caucus’ has already been formed by members of the Bangladesh National Parliament. This parliamentary platform is committed to bringing forward the relevant issues to fight TB at the highest levels of government. I believe that through the united cooperation of all, we will defeat TB.”
Dr Sayera Banu, Senior Scientist & Head of PEI, IDD, icddr,b, expressed her gratitude to all participants, stakeholders, and partners for their dedication and contributions towards the shared mission to end TB in Bangladesh.

The event highlighted the need for enhanced policy advocacy to engage the private sector in the country’s fight against TB. Collaborative efforts among the government, NGOs, and the private sector can lead to enhanced capacity and resource sharing, increased access to TB care, and better service delivery to the beneficiaries.

Editorial : Swadesh Roy

Editorial Office

First Floor, Capita Lake Front. Block J, House# 66, Banani Rd 18 Extension, Dhaka 1213