Search

Begin New Search Topic World Health Organization Political Geography Global Focus

1. How the G20 can hasten recovery from COVID-19

Author:
Maurice Obstfeld, Adam S. Posen, Olivier Blanchard, Chad P. Bown, Cullen S. Hendrix, Ana González, Simeon Djankov, Anne-Laure Kiechel, Anna Gelpern, Sean Hagan, Adnan Mazarei, Christopher G. Collins, Simon Potter, Edwin M. Truman, and Joseph E. Gagnon
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The world's leading economic powers must cooperate more to combat the health and economic shocks resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. In a new PIIE Briefing, Peterson Institute experts outline how collective action by the Group of Twenty (G20) nations can make a difference. The PIIE agenda includes removal of trade barriers impeding the flow of medical supplies and food, and more money for research, testing, and disease control, especially for debt-burdened low-income countries. The World Bank and the World Health Organization need more resources to relieve suffering, and the International Monetary Fund must step up to stabilize the world financial system.
Topic:
Economics, Health, World Health Organization, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, G20, and Coronavirus
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Toynbee Coronavirus Series: Erez Manela on the WHO, smallpox eradication, and the need for renewed internationalism

Author:
Erez Manela
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Toynbee Prize Foundation
Abstract:
Living through historically unprecedented times has strengthened the Toynbee Prize Foundation's commitment to thinking globally about history and to representing that perspective in the public sphere. In this multimedia series on the covid-19 pandemic, we will be bringing global history to bear in thinking through the raging coronavirus and the range of social, intellectual, economic, political, and scientific crises triggered and aggravated by it. Erez Manela researches international society and the modern international order. Recently he has written about smallpox and the globalization of development, illuminating the power structures and international infrastructure that underwrote the World Health Organization’s (WHO) smallpox eradication program from 1965 to 1980. Professor of History at Harvard University, Prof. Manela teaches the history of the United States in the world and modern international history, and is the Director of Graduate Programs at the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard and co-chair of the Harvard International and Global History seminar. He co-edits the Cambridge University book series ‘Global and International History.’
Topic:
Health, World Health Organization, Geopolitics, Public Health, Coronavirus, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. The United States and the World Health Organization

Author:
Theodore M. Brown
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
Abstract:
A little more than two months ago, U.S. President Donald Trump began to lash out at the World Health Organization, blaming it for what he claimed were missteps, failures, and prevarications in its handling of the coronavirus pandemic. Then, on April 14, after several days of threats, he announced that U.S. funding for the WHO would be frozen for sixty to ninety days while his administration conducted a review to “assess the World Health Organization’s role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of coronavirus.” Widely seen as a transparent attempt to deflect attention from his own inconsistent, incompetent, and irresponsible response to the crisis, Trump’s threatened withdrawal of funds from the WHO at a critical moment drew widespread condemnation from medical and public health leaders. Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief of Lancet, called Trump’s decision a “crime against humanity.” Dr. Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association, “denounced” the Trump administration’s decision to halt U.S. contributions to the WHO, which, he said, would “cripple the world’s response to COVID-19 and would harm the health and lives of thousands of Americans.”
Topic:
International Cooperation, World Health Organization, Coronavirus, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

4. What the World Health Organization must do to earn back US support

Author:
Danielle Pletka and Brett D. Schaefer
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
In a pandemic, a global health organization that is overly deferential to one nation and incapable of being an honest broker costs the very lives it exists to save. While China deserves primary blame for the devastation of COVID-19, the WHO also played a key role by failing to alert the world to Beijing’s lack of transparency. The WHO’s failures cannot be allowed to recur. Without change, it will fail again. It must implement reforms if it wants to restore confidence and earn US support.
Topic:
International Cooperation, World Health Organization, Coronavirus, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

5. The World Health Organization: The COVID-19 Pandemic and Transnational Law

Author:
Carla Piffer and Paulo Márcio Cruz
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
The reflections made in this writing, bring to discussion the importance of transnational law, in the face of the occurrence of the current pandemic. From this, considerations are made about the transnational law produced by the WHO against Covid-19. Also, an analysis is made of the central categories and their relationship with the prefix ‘trans-’ and transnational law. Subsequently, the WHO is discussed, its emergence and performance in the elaboration of a transnational legal framework to be considered when internalizing its guidelines by each Member State. In the context of final considerations, it is emphasized, in addition to the importance that should be attributed to transnational law that the work of the WHO, as a transnational actor, practices materialized acts such as transnational law, both in terms of guidance and in connection with public health matters. The methodology used was based on the inductive method, using the bibliographic research.
Topic:
World Health Organization, Law, Transnational Actors, Coronavirus, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Brazil and Global Focus

6. WHO Technical Report on Cancer Pricing Misses the Mark—It Should Focus on the “Demand Side”

Author:
Kalipso Chalkidou, Adrian Towse, and Richard Sullivan
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Criticising cancer medicine pricing as too high is what football fans know as an "open goal"—a target that is hard to miss. Yet somehow the World Health Organization (WHO) Technical Report on Cancer Pricing manages to do just that with a paper to the WHO Executive Board calling for price and cost transparency. The assumption goes that transparency will reduce the prices and costs of cancer medicines, a mantra that has united the Trump administration, the US Congress, and the Italian health minister with many NGOs who have called for “greater cost and price transparency”—a sentiment echoed by KEI, which states that “international action is required to improve transparency in reporting the costs of R&D and production, including public sources of funding.”
Topic:
World Health Organization, Health Care Policy, Medicine, Cancer, and Price
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Compelling Priorities for Global Health

Author:
Tedros Adhanom, Lee C. Bollinger, Jeffrey D. Sachs, Elizabeth Cameron, Gavin Schmidt, and Wilmot James
Publication Date:
09-2017
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Columbia University World Leaders Forum
Abstract:
A discussion featuring an address by Dr. Tedros Adhanom, Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO). The world today is trying to manage health risks associated with population growth, climate change, deforestation, institutional collapse, state failure, accidents, human error, war and terrorism. The full range of risks include infectious disease outbreaks, biological, chemical, radiological and nuclear spill-overs or attacks, multiple hazards, food insecurity, state fragility and cyber security failure or attacks. This is a breath-taking range of risks and no single institution can tackle it alone. It truly is humanity's common concern. As the UN agency responsible for global health, the World Health Organisation (WHO) is the organizational expression for humanity's common concern and we are honored to have the recently elected Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom address us on the priorities for his leadership. To discuss and debate with Dr. Tedros, we are delighted to have world leading experts in development, disease control and prevention and climate change and health dissect the opportunities and challenges in managing the health risks the world faces today. Welcoming remarks by Lee C. Bollinger, introduction by Jeffrey D. Sachs. Participants: Jeffrey D. Sachs, Elizabeth Cameron, and Gavin Schmidt. Moderator: Wilmot James
Topic:
Climate Change, Health, War, World Health Organization, Nuclear Power, and Food Security
Political Geography:
New York, Global Focus, and United States of America

8. Pandemic Declarations of the World Health Organization as an Exercise of International Public Authority: The Possible Legal Answers to Frictions Between Legitimacies

Author:
Pedro A. Villarreal
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
The institutional decisions regarding the 2009–2010 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic displayed how the World Health Organization’s (WHO) role as the international organization in charge of coordinating the pandemic response amounts to an exercise of authority. Notably, the 11 June, 2009 Pandemic Declaration was grounded in the WHO’s guidelines that do not have a binding nature according to international law. However, this is not an obstacle for considering them as an act of authority, since their effects can constrain the decision-making of States. If these non-binding acts have an authoritative nature, then it is necessary to address various legitimacy issues that may be present. This is where the concept of international public authority (IPA) can prove useful, since it enables to combine the non-binding nature of Pandemic Declarations and the respective guidelines with broad legally-oriented figures such as transparency and accountability. The controversies surrounding the 2009 Pandemic Declaration illustrate how the strictly technical-scientific elements that led to such a decision were not necessarily harmonious with other aspects more related to political decision making in general, such as transparency and accountability. This can be considered as an example of how so-called ‘technocratic legitimacy’ sometimes generates friction with lato sensu ‘political legitimacy’. As the 2009–2010 pandemic period unraveled, it became clear that expertise-based legitimacy is not sufficient in itself to consider the act as generally legitimate. On the contrary, the strongest criticisms directed at the decision-making process of the WHO during this event were leveled against deficits of transparency and accountability. This article purports to discuss the issue of how both types of legitimacies, technical-scientific and political, are necessary components for deeming Pandemic Declarations as legitimate enough, since they amount to an exercise of international public authority.
Topic:
International Law, World Health Organization, Public Health, and H1N1
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Law as an Antidote? Assessing the Potential of International Health Law Based on the Ebola-Outbreak 2014

Author:
Robert Frau
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
The Ebola-Outbreak of 2014 has put international health law in the limelight. This contribution assesses the measures taken by the international community with regard to the outbreak of 2014 with a special focus on the World Health Organization and the UN Security Council. International law provides different actors with means to cooperate in order to fight the outbreak. The list of actors does not include the UN Security Council, which has addressed the outbreak in one resolution under chapter VII without taking any effective legal remedies. In addition, the relevant human right to health has not been addressed by actors, creating leeway in further emergencies.
Topic:
International Cooperation, United Nations, World Health Organization, Ebola, Public Health, and Pandemic
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. Better Hospitals, Better Health Systems, Better Health – A Proposal for a Global Hospital Collaborative for Emerging Economies

Author:
Center for Global Development
Publication Date:
11-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Hospitals are central to building and maintaining healthy populations around the world. They serve as the first point of care for many, offer access to specialized care, act as loci for medical education and research, and influence standards for national health systems at large. Yet despite their centrality within health systems, hospitals have been sidelined to the periphery of the global health agenda as scarce financial resources, technical expertise, and political will instead focus on the expansion of accessible primary care. As a result, many hospitals in low- and middle-income countries have failed to evolve and modernize, both in operations and infrastructure, while the knowledge base on hospital effectiveness and efficiency remains small and inadequate. In turn, the standard of care and efficiency achieved by these hospitals has stagnated. The gap in treatment capacity and quality between wealthier and poorer countries—and between hospitals serving wealthier and poorer populations—is widening, just as emerging economies are poised to expand the range and depth of healthcare through universal health coverage.
Topic:
World Health Organization and Health Care Policy
Political Geography:
Global Focus