scholarly journals One Health Approach through interactive Urban Health Governance Framework in a Smart city, India

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasobant Sandul ◽  
Walter Bruchhausen ◽  
Deepak B. Saxena

ObjectiveThe present study aims to operationalize one health approach through local urban governance system in a rapidly urbanized Indian city, Ahmedabad, India.In Ahmedabad (proposed Smart city), Gujarat, India:1. To understand the pattern of zoonotic diseases in reference to urban governance system2. To develop a conceptual One Health Governance framework with reference to zoonotic diseases3. To assess the key indicators for convergence for inter-sectorial professional collaborations in One HealthIntroductionSmart governance refers to the emergence of joint action by the health and non-health sectors, public and private actors and citizens. Although, there are growing literature on governance and its potential impact on health, major challenges on collective action across sectors have been witnessed in developing countries like India. In the same line, the current forms of Global Health Governance façades operational issues and does not sufficiently meet the needs at local levels. In light of these perceived shortcomings, the local governance becomes subject of interest and should be debated especially with reference to global urbanization.Rapid and unplanned urbanization followed by the combination of high population density, poverty and lack of infrastructure have more side effects and fostering conditions for communicable diseases to flourish. Evidence suggests that new megacities could be incubators for new epidemic and zoonotic diseases, which can spread more rapidly and become worldwide threats. In India, Ministry of Urban Development initiated the concept of converting few major cities into “Smart City” in 2015-16. However, one of the major critiques of available smart city guideline is that it has no such focus on prevention of emerging and/or re-emerging zoonotic diseases. The emergence and/or re-emergence of zoonotic diseases should be considered as potential threats for these upcoming Smart Cities and hence, should be addressed by one health approach (health and non-health sectors, public and private actors) through an appropriate local governance strategy.With rapid urbanization and healthcare transformation in India, the operationalization of one health approach might become a major challenge, because of, the absence of the systematic effect at the national level and urban cities are riven between central, state and municipal authorities in terms of health policy, planning, health needs etc. There is also lack of information sharing or collaborations between the health and non-health sectors, public and private actors at the city level. Understanding these challenges can offer important lessons for strengthening both local urban governance and One Health.MethodsFor Objective-1: To understand the pattern of zoonotic diseases in reference to urban governance system1. Is there existing literature indicates the importance of governance system in prevention of zoonotic diseases in urban settingsUrban Governance System & Zoonotic diseases (Systematic Review)2. Is prevalence of zoonotic disease vary in accordance with change of local urban governance(Outcome: Prevalence of Zoonotic diseases & Exposure: Governance Index for last 10 years)For Objective-2: To develop a conceptual One Health Governance framework with reference to zoonotic diseases1. Is there evidence of existing One Health Governance framework exists One Health Governance Framework(Systematic Review & SWOT Analysis)2. To map the urban agencies working for zoonotic diseases Institutions for zoonotic diseases (Mapping)3. Is convergence possible for One Health in prevention of Zoonotic diseases (Policy Maker, System-level professionals Qualitative Key Informant Interviews)For Objective-3: To assess the key indicators for convergence for inter-sectorial professional collaborations in One Health1. Is developed governance framework operational at field level- KAP among Healthcare providers, Veterinarians, Environmental specialists2. Is there possibilities of convergence at field level for One health in prevention of zoonotic diseases (Qualitative Key Informant Interviews)ResultsThis is first of kind unique study to come up with a local urban governance convergence approach for “One Health” for the upcoming Smart city Ahmedabad, which may further be scaled up to other smart cities of India.ConclusionsUrban Health governance framework for a smart city to develop an one health approach.References[1] World Health Organization. Governance for Health in 21st Century. Available from: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/171334/RC62BD01-Governance-for-Health-Web.pdf [Last Accessed on December 2016][2] Dodgson R, Lee K, Drager N. Global Health Governance: a Conceptual Review. London: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; 2002.[3] Burris S. Governance, Microgovernance, and health. Temple Law Rev. 2004;77:334–362.[4] Hein W. Global health governance and national health policies in developing countries: conflicts and cooperation at the interfaces. In: Hein W, Kohlmorgan L, eds. Globalization, Global Health Governance and National Health Policies in Developing Countries: an Exploration Into the Dynamics of Interfaces. Hamburg: Deutschen Uebersee-Instituts; 2003:33–71.[5] Navarro V, Muntaner C, Borrell C, et al. Politics and health outcomes. Lancet. 2006; 368(9540):1033-7. 

Author(s):  
Jeremy Youde

While Chapter 3 focuses primarily on the evolution of global health governance, Chapter 4 pays more attention to its contemporary manifestation as a secondary institution within international society. This chapter discusses the current state of the global health governance architecture—who the important actors are, how they operate, how they have changed over the past twenty-five years, and how they illustrate the fundamental beliefs and attitudes within the global health governance system. In particular, the chapter discusses the relative balance between state-based and non-state actors, as well as public versus private actors. This chapter highlights five key players within contemporary global health governance: states; the World Health Organization; multilateral funding agencies; public–private partnerships; and non-state and private actors


Author(s):  
Jeremy Youde

China possesses the world’s largest economy, but that economic clout has not necessarily translated into taking leading roles within existing global health governance institutions and processes. It is a country that both contributes to and receives financial assistance from global health institutions. It has incorporated health into some of its foreign policy activities, but it has largely avoided proactively engaging with the values and norms embodied within the global health governance system. This ambivalent relationship reflects larger questions about how and whether China fits within international society and what its engagement or lack thereof might portend for international society’s future. This chapter examines China’s place within global health governance by examining its interactions with international society on global health issues, its use of health as a foreign policy tool, and its relationships with global health governance organizations.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Lawson Ung ◽  
J. Russell Stothard ◽  
Revati Phalkey ◽  
Andrew S. Azman ◽  
James Chodosh ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Angela Carriedo ◽  
Kathrin Lauber ◽  
Margaret M. Miller ◽  
Rob Ralston

This commentary engages with Suzuki and colleagues’ analysis about the ambiguity of multi-stakeholder discourses in the United Nations (UN) Political Declaration of the 3rd High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (HLM-NCDs), suggesting that blurring between public and private sector in this declaration reflects broader debates about multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) and public-private partnerships (PPPs) in health governance. We argue that the ambiguity between the roles and responsibilities of public and private actors involved may downplay the role (and regulation) of conflicts of interest (COI) between unhealthy commodity industries and public health. We argue that this ambiguity is not simply an artefact of the Political Declaration process, but a feature of multi-stakeholderism, which assumes that commercial actors´ interests can be aligned with the public interest. To safeguard global health governance, we recommend further empirical and conceptual research on COI and how it can be managed.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belinda Townsend ◽  
Erik Martin ◽  
Hans Löfgren ◽  
Evelyne de Leeuw

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document