HIV/AIDS, SARS, and COVID-19: the trajectory of China's pandemic responses and its changing politics in a contested world.

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the contested politics of global health governance, though we still don't know enough about the dynamics of domestic pandemic responses, or about the relationship between the politics of those responses and the politics of global health governance, both of which have changed significantly in recent decades. Focusing on three cases (HIV/AIDS, SARS, and COVID-19) of cross-border infectious diseases, this article explores the trajectory of China's pandemic responses in the context of globalization. Attending to changing politics at domestic, international, and global levels, I argue that those responses have been a complex combination of China's domestic politics (e.g., priorities, institutions, leadership, and timing), its international relations (especially with the US), and its engagements with global health governance. It is concluded that the increasing divergence of pandemic responses in a time of ubiquitous global health crisis demands urgent attention to the connections (including contestations) between domestic pandemic responses and the evolvement of global health governance from a broader perspective that considers changes in geopolitics.

The paradox of growing technical capacities with low global governance: a review of Voluntary National Reviews' SDG health-related indicators.

BACKGROUND: This study delves into the States' accountability for health-related Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicators from 2016 to 2020. An analysis of Voluntary National Reviews (VNR) is employed as an instrument to scrutinize the alignment of States' indicators with the global indicator framework, shedding light on global health governance within the context of the 2030 Agenda and States' strategic prioritization. A curation of 60 health-related indicators from 195 VNRs, produced during the aforementioned period, is organized into thematic groups. RESULTS: Our results highlight a concerning discrepancy in the reporting frequency of various health-related themes. The findings reveal a paradoxical coexistence characterized by the concurrent strengthening and diminution of the global health governance articulated in the Agenda's global health governance. This manifests in the increased utilization and consistency of health-related indicators over the study years, coupled with an emphasis on infectious diseases and child and maternal health indicators. Conversely, a discernible governance decline is evidenced by the inadequate representation of health-related indicators in VNRs, notably within the domains of universal health coverage and health system indicators. Furthermore, High-Income States exhibit diminished accountability. CONCLUSIONS: The VNRs unveil a paradox wherein burgeoning technical capacity coexists with governance deficits, a phenomenon attributable to both statistical capabilities and political preferences. The prevalent use of proxy indicators in VNRs oversimplifies the presentation of official indicators, thereby compromising the aspirational goal of pioneering statistical innovations for measuring intricate issues in the SDGs. In light of our conceptualization of the 2030 Agenda's global health as a regime complex governance, we advocate for comprehensive investigations into each health regime cluster. This approach aims to unravel disputes, discern patterns, and elucidate States' preferences concerning specific thematic areas. Functioning as an accountability mechanism for the Agenda's governance, VNRs underscore States' adaptability and short-term learning capabilities, offering valuable insights for identifying harmful goal prioritization. The discretionary nature of indicator selection by States in the VNRs, enabled by the Agenda's proposition of a contextual adaptation of the SDGs and a blind eye to the guideline's request to review all SDG indicators, highlights a critical flaw in the VNR as an accountability mechanism.

COVID-19-related global health governance and population health priorities for health equity in G20 countries: a scoping review.

Since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, the promotion of health equity including the health of various population sub-groups has been compromised, human rights jeopardised, and social inequities further exacerbated. Citizens worldwide, including in the Group of 20 (G20) countries, were affected by both global health governance (GHG) processes and decisions and public health measures taken by governments to respond to COVID-19. While it is critical to swiftly respond to COVID-19, little is known about how and to what extent the GHG is affecting population health priorities for health equity in global economies such as the G20 countries. This scoping review synthesised and identified knowledge gaps on how the COVID-19-related GHG is affecting population health priorities for policy, programme, and research in G20 countries. We followed the five-stage scoping review methodology promoted by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We searched four bibliographic databases for references conducted in G20 countries and regions and published in English and French, between January 2020 and April 2023. Out of 4,625 references and after two phases of screening, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. G20 countries included in the review were Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and the European Union. We found insufficient collaboration and coordination and misalignment among governance actors at multiple levels. In most cases, equity considerations were not prioritised while unequal consequences of COVID-19 public health measures on population groups were widely reported. COVID-19-related population health priorities mainly focused on upstream and midstream determinants of health. Our scoping review showed the stark inequities of COVID-19 public health outcomes, coupled with a prevalent lack of coherent collaboration and coordination among governance actors. Moreover, governance as an object of empirical study is still emerging when examining its intersection with global health and population health policy, programme, and research. An urgent shift is required to effectively act upon structural health determinants that include transformative and comprehensive policies for prevention, equity, resilience, and sustainable health.

The utilisation of legal instruments by United Nations actors to restrict the exposure of children to unhealthy food and beverage marketing: a qualitative content analysis of UN instruments.

INTRODUCTION: United Nations (UN) agencies are influential global health actors that can introduce legal instruments to call on Member States to act on pressing issues. This paper examines the deployment and strength of global health law instruments used by UN actors to call on Member States to restrict the exposure of children to unhealthy food and beverage marketing. METHODS: Global health law instruments were identified from a review of four UN agencies that have a mandate over children's exposure to marketing of unhealthy food and beverage products namely: the World Health Organization (WHO); the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO); the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Data on marketing restrictions were extracted and coded and descriptive qualitative content analysis was used to assess the strength of the instruments. RESULTS: A wide range of instruments have been used by the four agencies: seven by the WHO; two by the FAO; three by the UNGA; and eight by the UN human rights infrastructure. The UN human rights instruments used strong, consistent language and called for government regulations to be enacted in a directive manner. In contrast, the language calling for action by the WHO, FAO and UNGA was weaker, inconsistent, did not get stronger over time and varied according to the type of instrument used. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that a child rights-based approach to restricting unhealthy food and beverage marketing to children would be supported by strong human rights legal instruments and would allow for more directive recommendations to Member States than is currently provided by WHO, FAO and UNGA. Strengthening the directives in the instruments to clarify Member States' obligations using both WHO and child rights mandates would increase the utility of global health law and UN actors' influence.

Challenges in international health financing and implications for the new pandemic fund.

BACKGROUND: The failures of the international COVID-19 response highlighted key gaps in pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). The G20 and WHO have called for additional funding of $10.5 billion per year to adequately strengthen the global PPR architecture. In response to these calls, in 2022 the World Bank announced the launch of a new Financial Intermediary Fund (The Pandemic Fund) to catalyse this additional funding. However, there is considerable unclarity regarding the governance makeup and financial modalities of the Pandemic Fund, and divergence of opinion about whether the Fund has been successfully designed to respond to key challenges in global health financing. METHODS/RESULTS: The article outlines eight challenges associated with global health financing instruments and development aid for health within the global health literature. These include misaligned aid allocation; accountability; multistakeholder representation and participation; country ownership; donor coherency and fragmentation; transparency; power dynamics, and; anti-corruption. Using available information about the Pandemic Fund, the article positions the Pandemic Fund against these challenges to determine in what ways the financing instrument recognizes, addresses, partially addresses, or ignores them. The assessment argues that although the Pandemic Fund has adopted a few measures to recognise and address some of the challenges, overall, the Pandemic Fund has unclear policies in response to most of the challenges while leaving many unaddressed. CONCLUSION: It remains unclear how the Pandemic Fund is explicitly addressing challenges widely recognized in the global health financing literature. Moreover, there is evidence that the Pandemic Fund might be exacerbating these global financing challenges, thus raising questions about its potential efficacy, suitability, and chances of success. In response, this article offers four sets of policy recommendations for how the Pandemic Fund and the PPR financing architecture might respond more effectively to the identified challenges.

A Principled Account of AMR Global Governance Solidarity, Subsidiarity, and Stewardship.

This commentary defines what shared yet differentiated ethical responsibilities to tackle antimicrobial resistance (AMR) mean, by introducing a threefold principled account of AMR global governance. It argues that the principles of solidarity, subsidiarity, and stewardship can be especially helpful for further justifying some of the universal, differentiated, and individual responsibilities that Van Katwyk et al propose. The upshot of my threefold principled account of AMR global governance is a less ambitious AMR treaty, one that can only justify (i) universal duties of global coordination (as per the principle of solidarity); (ii) differentiated duties to local communities, which bear the primary AMR responsibilities (as per the principle of subsidiarity); and (iii) individualized duties for ensuring truthful, evidence-based, consistent, and timely shared accountable communication (as per the principle of stewardship).

'Choice should be made through educated decisions not regressive dictates': discursive framings of a proposed 'sugar tax' in Bermuda: analysis of submissions to a government consultation.

BACKGROUND: Several governments have introduced taxes on products with high sugar content as part of their obesity prevention strategies. Bermuda is the first jurisdiction to apply such measures in the Caribbean - a region of small island developing states and territories with high obesity prevalence and substantial reliance on imported food products. This study examines how commercial and health actors framed the proposed introduction of a 75% import tariff on high-sugar products, based on written submissions to the Bermudan government. METHODS: Eleven submissions containing written comments were analysed with reference to their framing of the proposed import tariff, the 'problem' of obesity, and the relationship between the two (including alternative policy approaches for tackling obesity). RESULTS: Key emergent frames were complexity, partnership, products, personal responsibility, affordability and evidence. Respondents favoured different framings, depending on whether they supported or opposed the proposed import duty. Commercial actors were universally opposed, presenting obesity as a 'complex' problem that would be better addressed through government-industry partnerships (a framing particularly favoured by international and regional business associations). Increased product range and an emphasis on personal responsibility were also positioned as policy alternatives. Health actors expressed partial support for the proposed sugar tax, although this was tempered by a perceived lack of evidence where the proposal differed from sugar taxes introduced elsewhere. Like commercial respondents, health actors framed obesity as a 'complex' problem and emphasised the need for other measures, including efforts to address the affordability of fruits and vegetables. CONCLUSION: In responding to a proposed 'sugar tax' in Bermuda, commercial actors opposed the proposal and stated a clear preference for 'partnership' approaches to tackling obesity. Commercial responses were dominated by local businesses (with only two responses received from international or regional business associations), perhaps reflecting Bermuda's reliance on tourism and hospitality and the specificity of the proposed intervention (that is, an import tariff rather than an excise tax). The much smaller number of responses from health actors suggests limited civil society capacity. Nevertheless, the Bermudan government successfully introduced a 75% tariff on high-sugar imports, demonstrating the potential for policy innovation to address obesity in small-island jurisdictions.

Regulation of genetically engineered (GE) mosquitoes as a public health tool: a public health ethics analysis.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, genetically engineered (GE) mosquitoes have been proposed as a public health measure against the high incidence of mosquito-borne diseases among the poor in regions of the global South. While uncertainties as well as risks for humans and ecosystems are entailed by the open-release of GE mosquitoes, a powerful global health governance non-state organization is funding the development of and advocating the use of those bio-technologies as public health tools. In August 2016, the US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) approved the uncaged field trial of a GE Aedes aegypti mosquito in Key Haven, Florida. The FDA's decision was based on its assessment of the risks of the proposed experimental public health research project. The FDA is considered a global regulatory standard setter. So, its approval of the uncaged field trial could be used by proponents of GE mosquitoes to urge countries in the global South to permit the use of those bio-technologies. METHOD: From a public health ethics perspective, this paper evaluates the FDA's 2016 risk assessment of the proposed uncaged field trial of the GE mosquito to determine whether it qualified as a realistic risk evaluation. RESULTS: The FDA's risk assessment of the proposed uncaged field trial did not proximate the conditions under which the GE mosquitoes would be used in regions of the global South where there is a high prevalence of mosquito-borne diseases. CONCLUSION: Given that health and disease have political-economic determinants, whether a risk assessment of a product is realistic or not particularly matters with respect to interventions meant for public health problems that disproportionately impact socio-economically marginalized populations. If ineffective public health interventions are adopted based on risk evaluations that do not closely mirror the conditions under which those products would actually be used, there could be public health and ethical costs for those populations.

Global health governance and disaster recovery for rebel returnees during COVID-19.

This article highlights the need for governing some gradual ruptures from the past to achieve a sense of new normalcy in public health. The rebel returnees during the pandemic form a case of a vulnerable group who triply experience disasters: from the pandemic and natural disasters to terrorism. Global health governance carries on the management of past problems attaining their maturation and faces new ones for disaster recovery.

Public health considerations for transitioning beyond the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in the EU/EEA.

Many countries, including some within the EU/EEA, are in the process of transitioning from the acute pandemic phase. During this transition, it is crucial that countries' strategies and activities remain guided by clear COVID-19 control objectives, which increasingly will focus on preventing and managing severe outcomes. Therefore, attention must be given to the groups that are particularly vulnerable to severe outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including individuals in congregate and healthcare settings. In this phase of pandemic management, a strong focus must remain on transitioning testing approaches and systems for targeted surveillance of COVID-19, capitalising on and strengthening existing systems for respiratory virus surveillance. Furthermore, it will be crucial to focus on lessons learned from the pandemic to enhance preparedness and to enact robust systems for the preparedness, detection, rapid investigation and assessment of new and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Filling existing knowledge gaps, including behavioural insights, can help guide the response to future resurgences of SARS-CoV-2 and/or the emergence of other pandemics. Finally, 'vaccine agility' will be needed to respond to changes in people's behaviours, changes in the virus, and changes in population immunity, all the while addressing issues of global health equity.

An innovative and integrated model for global outbreak response and research - a case study of the UK Public Health Rapid Support Team (UK-PHRST).

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable institutional experimentation at national and international levels in response to calls for global health security reform, there is little research on organisational models that address outbreak preparedness and response. Created in the aftermath of the 2013-16 West African Ebola epidemic, the United Kingdom's Public Health Rapid Support Team (UK-PHRST) was designed to address critical gaps in outbreak response illuminated during the epidemic, while leveraging existing UK institutional strengths. The partnership between the government agency, Public Health England, and an academic consortium, led by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, seeks to integrate outbreak response, operational research and capacity building. We explored the design, establishment and early experiences of the UK-PHRST as one of the first bodies of its kind globally, paying particular attention to governance decisions which enabled them to address their complex mission. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative case study using 19 in-depth interviews with individuals knowledgeable about the team's design and implementation, review of organisational documents, and observations of meetings to analyse the UK-PHRST's creation, establishment and initial 2 years of operations. RESULTS: According to key informants, adopting a triple mandate (response, research and capacity building) established the team as novel in the global epidemic response architecture. Key governance decisions recognised as vital to the model included: structuring the team as a government-academic collaboration which leveraged long-term and complementary UK investments in public health and the higher education sector; adopting a more complex, dual reporting and funding structure to maintain an ethos of institutional balance between lead organisations; supporting a multidisciplinary team of experts to respond early in outbreaks for optimal impact; prioritising and funding epidemic research to influence response policy and practice; and ensuring the team's activities reinforced the existing global health architecture. CONCLUSION: The UK-PHRST aims to enhance global outbreak response using an innovative and integrated model that capitalises on institutional strengths of the partnership. Insights suggest that despite adding complexity, integrating operational research through the government-academic collaboration contributed significant advantages. This promising model could be adopted and adapted by countries seeking to build similar outbreak response and research capacities.

The emergence of post-Westphalian health governance during the Covid-19 pandemic: the European Health Union.

The response to the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020-21 was dominated by the Westphalian primacy of national territory and sovereignty, significantly worsening and prolonging this crisis. Global platforms for cross-border coordination and cooperation were constrained by national self-interest. Arguably, the lack of a worldwide supranational (or post-Westphalian) authority in health governance is one important structural reason for the fragmented, chaotic, and ineffective response to Covid-19. The failure of Westphalian governance responses to the pandemic provides a unique opportunity for post-Westphalian governance structures to be established and contribute to reforming international pandemic preparedness. While this is unlikely to happen soon at the global level, a comprehensive framework is emerging at the European Union level in the form of a European Health Union. Through a combined conceptualisation of supranational governance and the securitisation process of international health crises, Covid-19 has opened the door to post-Westphalian health governance coordinated by the European Commission.

Non-communicable disease governance in the era of the sustainable development goals: a qualitative analysis of food industry framing in WHO consultations.

BACKGROUND: The UN system's shift towards multistakeholder governance, now embedded in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), invites a broad range of actors, including the private sector, to the policymaking table. Although the tobacco industry is formally excluded from engagement, this approach provides opportunities for other unhealthy commodity industries to influence the World Health Organization's (WHO's) non-communicable disease (NCD) agenda. Focusing on the food industry, this research maps which actors engaged with WHO consultations, and critically examines actors' policy and governance preferences as well as the framing they employ to promote these preferences in the global context. METHODS: All written responses from food industry actors to publicly available NCD-relevant WHO consultations held between September 2015 and September 2018 were identified, totalling forty-five responses across five consultations. A qualitative frame analysis was conducted to identify policy positions expressed by respondents, as well as arguments and frames used to do so. RESULTS: Though no individual companies responded to the consultations, the majority of participating business associations had some of the largest multinational food corporations as members. Respondents overarchingly promoted non-statutory approaches and opposed statutory regulation and conflict of interest safeguards. To this purpose, they framed the food industry as a legitimate and necessary partner in policymaking, differentiating themselves from the tobacco industry and referencing a history of successful collaboration, while also invoking multistakeholder norms and good governance principles to portray collaboration as required. Respondents contrasted this with the limits of WHO's mandate, portraying it as out of step with the SDGs and framing NCD decision-making as a matter of national sovereignty. CONCLUSION: We observed that the UN's call for partnerships to support the SDGs is invoked to defend corporate access to NCD policy. This highlights the need for more cautious approaches which are mindful of the commercial determinants of health. Systematic opposition to regulation and to governance approaches which may compromise commercial actors' insider role in global health by food industry actors shown here, and the strategic use of the Sustainable Development agenda to this purpose, raises questions about the value of collaboration from the perspective of international health agencies such as WHO.

Law, Global Health, and Sustainable Development: The Lancet Commission on the Legal Determinants of Health.

In 2019 the Lancet Commission on the Legal Determinants of Health set out the important role that law can play in supporting global health. The Report sets out four legal determinants of health which address the role of law in supporting sustainable development; law's role in strengthening national and international governance; the importance of evidence-based public health laws; and the importance of building legal capacities for health. This Editorial provides an overview of the Report and its recommendations.

How environmental treaties contribute to global health governance.

BACKGROUND: Recent work in international relations theory argues that international regimes do not develop in isolation, as previously assumed, but evolve as open systems that interact with other regimes. The implications of this insight's for sustainable development remains underexplored. Even thought environmental protection and health promotion are clearly interconnected at the impact level, it remains unclear how global environmental governance interacts with global health governance at the institutional level. In order to fill this gap, this article aims to assess how environmental treaties contribute to global health governance. METHODS AND RESULTS: To assess how environmental treaties contribute to global health governance, we conducted a content analysis of 2280 international environmental treaties. For each of these treaties, we measure the type and number of health-related provisions in these treaties. The result is the Health and Environment Interplay Database (HEIDI), which we make public with the publication of this article. This new database reveals that more than 300 environmental treaties have health-related provisions. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the global environmental regime contributes significantly to the institutionalization of the global health regime, considering that the health regime includes itself very few treaties focusing primarily on health. When reflecting on how global governance can improve population health, decision makers should not only consider the instruments available to them within the realm of global health institutions. They should broaden their perspectives to integrate the contribution of other global regimes, such as the global environmental regime.

The global fight against trans-fat: the potential role of international trade and law.

Non-communicable diseases in general and cardiovascular diseases in particular are a leading cause of death globally. Trans-fat consumption is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. The World Health Organization's 'REPLACE' action package of 2018 aims to eliminate it completely in the global food supply by 2023. Legislative and other regulatory actions (i.e., banning trans-fat) are considered as effective means to achieve such a goal. Both wealthier and poorer countries are taking or considering action, as shown by the United States food regulations and Cambodian draft food legislation discussed in this paper. This paper reviews these actions and examines public and private stakeholders' incentives to increase health-protecting or health-promoting standards and regulations at home and abroad, setting the ground for further research on the topic. It focuses on the potential of trade incentives as a potential driver of a 'race to the top'. While it has been documented that powerful countries use international trade instruments to weaken other countries' national regulations, at times these powerful countries may also be interested in more stringent regulations abroad to protect their exports from competition from third countries with less stringent regulations. This article explores practical and principled considerations on how such a dynamic may spread trans-fat restrictions globally. It argues that trade dynamics and public health considerations within powerful countries may help to promote anti-trans-fat regulation globally but will not be sufficient and is ethically questionable. True international regulatory cooperation is needed and could be facilitated by the World Health Organization. Nevertheless, the paper highlights that international trade and investment law offers opportunities for anti-trans-fat policy diffusion globally.

Blending integrated knowledge translation with global health governance: an approach for advancing action on a wicked problem.

BACKGROUND: The persistence of health inequities is a wicked problem for which there is strong evidence of causal roots in the maldistribution of power, resources and money within and between countries. Though the evidence is clear, the solutions are far from straightforward. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) ought to be well suited for designing evidence-informed solutions, yet current frameworks are limited in their capacity to navigate complexity. Global health governance (GHG) also ought to be well suited to advance action, but a lack of accountability, inclusion and integration of evidence gives rise to politically driven action. Recognising a persistent struggle for meaningful action, we invite contemplation about how blending IKT with GHG could leverage the strengths of both processes to advance health equity. DISCUSSION: Action on root causes of health inequities implicates disruption of structures and systems that shape how society is organised. This infinitely complex work demands sophisticated examination of drivers and disrupters of inequities and a vast imagination for who (and what) should be engaged. Yet, underlying tendencies toward reductionism seem to drive superficial responses. Where IKT models lack consideration of issues of power and provide little direction for how to support cohesive efforts toward a common goal, recent calls from the field of GHG may provide insight into these issues. Additionally, though GHG is criticised for its lack of attention to using evidence, IKT offers approaches and strategies for collaborative processes of generating and refining knowledge. Contemplating the inclusion of governance in IKT requires re-examining roles, responsibilities, power and voice in processes of connecting knowledge with action. We argue for expanding IKT models to include GHG as a means of considering the complexity of issues and opening new possibilities for evidence-informed action on wicked problems. CONCLUSION: Integrated learning between these two fields, adopting principles of GHG alongside the strategies of IKT, is a promising opportunity to strengthen leadership for health equity action.

What did the Go4Health policy research project contribute to the policy discourse on the sustainable development goals? A reflexive review.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the European Commission funded Go4Health-Goals and Governance for Global Health, a consortium of 13 academic research and human rights institutions from both Global North and South-to track the evolution of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and provide ongoing policy advice. This paper reviews the research outputs published between 2012 and 2016, analyzing the thematic content of the publications, and the influence on global health and development discourse through citation metrics. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION: Analysis of the 54 published papers showed 6 dominant themes related to the SDGs: the formulation process for the SDG health goal; the right to health; Universal Health Coverage; voices of marginalized peoples; global health governance; and the integration of health across the other SDGs. The papers combined advocacy---particularly for the right to health and its potential embodiment in Universal Health Coverage-with qualitative research and analysis of policy and stakeholders. Go4Health's publications on the right to health, global health governance and the voices of marginalized peoples in relation to the SDGs represented a substantial proportion of papers published for these topics. Go4Health analysis of the right to health clarified its elements and their application to Universal Health Coverage, global health governance, financing the SDGs and access to medicines. Qualitative research identified correspondence between perceptions of marginalized peoples and right to health principles, and reluctance among multilateral organizations to explicitly represent the right to health in the goals, despite their acknowledgement of their importance. Citation metrics analysis confirmed an average of 5.5 citations per paper, with a field-weighted citation impact of 2.24 for the 43 peer reviewed publications. Citations in the academic literature and UN policy documents confirmed the impact of Go4Health on the global discourse around the SDGs, but within the Go4Health consortium there was also evidence of two epistemological frames of analysis-normative legal analysis and empirical research-that created productive synergies in unpacking the health SDG and the right to health. CONCLUSION: The analysis offers clear evidence for the contribution of funded programmatic research-such as the Go4Health project-to the global health discourse.

Intervention mapping to address social and economic factors impacting indigenous people's health in Suriname's interior region.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies found that while internationally financed economic development projects reduced poverty when measured in terms of per capita GDP, they also caused indigenous people to become disassociated, impoverished and alienated minorities whose health status has declined to unacceptable lows when measured in terms of mercury poisoning and the burgeoning rate of suicide. In this study, we developed a needs assessment and a policy-oriented causal diagram to determine whether the impaired health of the people in this region was at least partially due to the role the country has played within the global economy. Specifically, could the health and well-being of indigenous people in Suriname be understood in terms of the foreign investment programs and economic development policies traceable to the Inter-American Development Bank's Suriname Land Management Project. METHODS: Interviews took place from 2004 through 2015 involving stakeholders with an interest in public health and economic development. A policy-oriented causal diagram was created to model a complex community health system and weave together a wide range of ideas and views captured during the interview process. RESULTS: Converting land and resources held by indigenous people into private ownership has created an active market for land, increased investment and productivity, and reduced poverty when measured in terms of per capita GDP. However, it has also caused indigenous people to become disassociated, impoverished and alienated minorities whose health status has declined to unacceptable lows. While the effects of economic development programs on the health of vulnerable indigenous communities are clear, the governance response is not. The governance response appeared to be determined less by the urgency of the public health issue or by the compelling logic of an appropriate response, and more by competing economic interests and the exercise of power. CONCLUSION: The health and well-being of the indigenous Wayana in Suriname's interior region is at least partially due to the role the country has played within the global economy. Specifically, the health and well-being of indigenous people in Suriname can be understood to be a result of foreign development bank-funded projects that drive the government of Suriname to trade land and natural resources on the global market to manage their country's balance of payments.

Controlling corporate influence in health policy making? An assessment of the implementation of article 5.3 of the World Health Organization framework convention on tobacco control.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) stands to significantly reduce tobacco-related mortality by accelerating the introduction of evidence-based tobacco control measures. However, the extent to which States Parties have implemented the Convention varies considerably. Article 5.3 of the FCTC, is intended to insulate policy-making from the tobacco industry's political influence, and aims to address barriers to strong implementation of the Convention associated with tobacco industry political activity. This paper quantitatively assesses implementation of Article 5.3's Guidelines for Implementation, evaluates the strength of Parties' efforts to implement specific recommendations, and explores how different approaches to implementation expose the policy process to continuing industry influence. METHODS: We cross-referenced a broad range of documentary data (including FCTC Party reports and World Bank data on the governance of conflicts of interest in public administration) against Article 5.3 implementation guidelines (n = 24) for 155 Parties, and performed an in-depth thematic analysis to examine the strength of implementation for specific recommendations. RESULTS: Across all Parties, 16% of guideline recommendations reviewed have been implemented. Eighty-three percent of Parties that have taken some action under Article 5.3 have introduced less than a third of the guidelines. Most compliance with the guidelines is achieved through pre-existing policy instruments introduced independently of the FCTC, which rarely cover all relevant policy actors and fall short of the guideline recommendations. Measures introduced in response to the FCTC are typically restricted to health ministries and not explicit about third parties acting on behalf of the industry. Parties systematically overlook recommendations that facilitate industry monitoring. CONCLUSION: Highly selective and incomplete implementation of specific guideline recommendations facilitates extensive ongoing opportunities for industry policy influence. Stronger commitment to implementation is required to ensure consistently strong compliance with the FCTC internationally.