scholarly journals 'Technologies of Reflexivity': Generating Biopolitics and Institutional Risk to Supplement Global Public Health Security

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Leslie Flear
2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 658-685
Author(s):  
Mark L FLEAR

AbstractCritiques of global public health security (GPHS) and proposed solutions tend to overlook the potential of the individuals and groups that are subject to and governed by GPHS – “the governed” – to contribute their “on the ground” knowledge and experience to decision-making in order to improve regulatory responses. This article argues for the development of a more reflexive approach as a way of ensuring the epistemic integration of these knowledges with the scientific-technical knowledges that currently dominate decision-making processes. I identify human rights as the conceptual lens that is most likely to enable reflexivity by the governed and regulators, and understanding and communication between them. The governed can use perceived or actual breaches of human rights to articulate “on the ground” knowledges as institutional risks to reputation and standing and, in turn, threaten the production and legitimation of organisational identity, socio-political orders and projects of rule. The particular sensitivity of regulators to these risks could compel epistemic integration. This more reflexive approach to GPHS promises to improve the knowledge base, efficacy, accountability and legitimacy of decision-making at multiple levels: WHO, EU, national and “on the ground”.


JAMA ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 298 (11) ◽  
pp. 1268
Author(s):  
Joan Stephenson

2006 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
COLIN McINNES ◽  
KELLEY LEE

Over the past decade, health has become an increasingly important international issue and one which has engaged the attention of the foreign and security policy community. This article examines the emerging relationship between foreign and security policy, and global public health. It argues that the agenda has been dominated by two issues – the spread of selected infectious diseases (including HIV/AIDS) and bio-terror. It argues that this is a narrow framing of the agenda which could be broadened to include a wider range of issues. We offer two examples: health and internal instability, including the role of health in failing states and in post-conflict reconstruction; and illicit activities. We also argue that the relationship between global public health, and foreign and security policy has prioritised the concerns of the latter over the former – how selected health issues may create risks for (inter)national security or economic growth. Moreover the interests of the West are prominent on this agenda, focusing (largely though not exclusively) on how health risks in the developing world might impact upon the West. It is less concerned with the promotion of global public health.


2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (35) ◽  
Author(s):  
Collective Editorial team

On 23 August, the World Health Organization published its latest World Health Report, subtitled ‘A Safer Future: Global Public Health Security in the 21st Century’.


Author(s):  
Ieva_Daniela Beinarovica

Due to globalization and continuous development and mutation and development of various pathogens, infectious diseases have transcended the public health sector and become issues of Global Public Health Security. Influenza – an infectious disease that is both a cyclical, yearly occurrence and the cause of several deadly global pandemics – regularly challenges the public health sector thus providing opportunities for policy learning and evidence bases policy change. By applying the Algorithm for continuous analysis of policy learning and change, this publication investigates whether and how policy learning and change took place in Latvia after the 2006/2007 influenza season, when a record number of infection cases was registered. Although the conclusions of this publication cannot be generalized, it provides valuable insights for future research, especially for the analysis of the management of the Covid-19 pandemic in Latvia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Petelos

Abstract The WHO has highlighted the technical challenges of assessing immunity status, cautioning against immunity passports. Similarly, the ECDC indicated that “current scientific knowledge that exists on the immunological response to SARS-CoV-2 (quality, quantity and duration of human antibodies) or the available testing methods (laboratory based and point-of-care)” does not support their use. Accordingly, the European Commission has emphasised the risks compulsory testing, noting that “border control [is not] an effective measure to limit the transmission of the virus, while the Council of Europe raises awareness of the interference of SARS-CoV-2 measures on human rights, underlining that “the major social, political and legal challenge facing our Member States will be their ability to respond to this crisis effectively, whilst ensuring that the measures they take do not undermine our genuine long-term interest in safeguarding Europe's founding values of human rights, democracy and the rule of law”. Nevertheless, immunity passports and immunity registries are being discussed more than ever before, with governments under pressure to find a viable solution. This presentation will examine the GDPR, and current legislation protecting rights vs. legislation allowing testing, quarantine, administration of medicines, recording of immunity vs. vaccination. It will debate the legal nature of immunity passports and the relevance to fundamental European freedoms, linking key concepts to global public health law. Implications regarding the personal right in Health/right of Public Health and legal substance and human rights limitations will also be examined. Criteria and the use of immunity passports as limitations of human rights -prescribed by law, legitimate aim and necessary in a democratic society- with extrapolation in terms of discrimination will be discussed. Finally, the jurisprudential approach and control (national, European, ECHR, global) will be mentioned, along with a brief highlight to the implications for migrant populations and cross-border care.


2007 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 1447-1452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guénaël Rodier ◽  
Allison L. Greenspan ◽  
James M. Hughes ◽  
David L. Heymann

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 653-667
Author(s):  
Frederick M. Burkle

AbstractSince 1945, the reasons for major crises and how the world responds to them have changed every 10-15 years or sooner. Whereas these crises vary greatly across global regions, their economic, environmental, ecological, social, and disease aspects are increasingly under the influence of widely integrated global changes and forces arising primarily from: climate extremes; rapid unsustainable urbanization; critical biodiversity losses; and emergencies of scarcity in water, food, and energy. These slow-moving but increasingly severe crises affect larger populations across many borders and lead to the emergence of increasing population-based, preventable public health emergencies related to water, sanitation, food, shelter, energy, and related health illnesses, and ultimately global health security. This report explores the impact of these crises on Asia and the Pacific region, and their potential for regional conflict.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 101053
Author(s):  
Peter J. Hotez ◽  
Carolina Batista ◽  
Yanis Ben Amor ◽  
Onder Ergonul ◽  
J Peter Figueroa ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document