Gender Equality and Sustainable Development Within the Scope of Peace as a Global Public Good

In this chapter, it aimed to bring a multidimensional approach to the “peace” process. The elements of this multiple approach are gender equality and global public policies. It is thought that the mobilization of these two elements in the peace process will be the cornerstone of sustainable development in the world. In this context, gender equality (Goal 5) and peace, justice and strong insights (Goal 16), which is one of the United Nations' sustainable development goals, are engaged in the global public policies. Accordingly, public policies and the peace process involving women will lead to a chain impact that will support sustainable development. While ensuring gender equality provides a solution in the peace process, peace building, and gender equality contribute to sustainable development together. Because the empowerment of the most damaged society in the post-war period will undoubtedly contribute to sustainable development.

Ethical health security in the age of antimicrobial resistance

ObjectiveOwing to its potential human, social and economic costs, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is frequently referred to as a threat to health security. Simultaneously, health security and the preservation of antimicrobials are often described as a global public good. However, how the term ‘public good’ is used in the context of health security, and the values that underpin it, remains ambiguous. Policymaking is never value-free, and a better examination of such values is critical to understanding how issues such as AMR are problematised and how policy decisions are informed.DesignWe used McDougall’s version of critical interpretive synthesis to capture the recurring concepts and arguments within public policy, political science and applied ethics literature on AMR. Articles were analysed by identifying recurring ideas and developing themes across the literature.ResultsA total of 77 papers were included in our review. In the context of health security and AMR, the concept of ‘public good’ appears to be used interchangeably with ‘common good’, reflecting confusion, but sometimes meaningful differences, regarding how antimicrobials, as a good, are conceived. Main approaches to addressing AMR are statism, globalism and regionalism, which appeal to different values in guiding policymakers. Common justificatory values underpinning preservation of antimicrobials as a public good were prevention of harm, solidarity, justice and rights.ConclusionThe findings suggest that within the literature there is a lack of conceptual clarity as to whether antimicrobials constitute a public good or a common good. Moreover, the way in which antimicrobials are conceived and the approaches through which AMR as a threat to health security is addressed appear to be grounded in values that are often implicit. Being explicit about the values that underpin AMR and health security is not simply an intellectual exercise but has very real policy and programmatic implications.

Quad: Origin and Evolving Dynamics

Quad is not a formal treaty, and for its members, it is not the only platform in Asia. It has brought like-minded maritime democracies together to create a Free and Open Indo-Pacific. It has responded to disaster crises and the pandemic more promptly than China’s aggressive moves in the Indo-Pacific region. This article aims to understand the origin of ‘the Quad’ referred to as Quad 1.0 and its failure in 2007 and re-emergence of it as Quad 2.0. Quad 2.0 is further divided into the pre-pandemic Quad 2.1 and pandemic onset Quad 2.2. This article articulates the trajectory that Quad has traversed to reach Summit level meetings and its pursued agenda. The latest development in this arena is forming a trilateral agreement between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom (AUKUS). This article questions the role of Quad in view of the formation of AUKUS and draw on its implications. It concludes that Quad has faltered in answering the security concern, paving the way for AUKUS. Quad’s role is likely to turn towards a developmental paradigm of ‘productive global public good’. In the long run, this will help create an equitable cohesive region and realize the ambition of a Free and Open Indo-Pacific.

mUzima Mobile Electronic Health Record (EHR) System: Development and Implementation at Scale

Background The predominant implementation paradigm of electronic health record (EHR) systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) relies on standalone system installations at facilities. This implementation approach exacerbates the digital divide, with facilities in areas with inadequate electrical and network infrastructure often left behind. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have been implemented to extend the reach of digital health, but these systems largely add to the problem of siloed patient data, with few seamlessly interoperating with the EHR systems that are now scaled nationally in many LMICs. Robust mHealth applications that effectively extend EHR systems are needed to improve access, improve quality of care, and ameliorate the digital divide. Objective We report on the development and scaled implementation of mUzima, an mHealth extension of the most broadly deployed EHR system in LMICs (OpenMRS). Methods The “Guidelines for reporting of health interventions using mobile phones: mobile (mHealth) evidence reporting assessment (mERA)” checklist was employed to report on the mUzima application. The World Health Organization (WHO) Principles for Digital Development framework was used as a secondary reference framework. Details of mUzima’s architecture, core features, functionalities, and its implementation status are provided to highlight elements that can be adapted in other systems. Results mUzima is an open-source, highly configurable Android application with robust features including offline management, deduplication, relationship management, security, cohort management, and error resolution, among many others. mUzima allows providers with lower-end Android smartphones (version 4.4 and above) who work remotely to access historical patient data, collect new data, view media, leverage decision support, conduct store-and-forward teleconsultation, and geolocate clients. The application is supported by an active community of developers and users, with feature priorities vetted by the community. mUzima has been implemented nationally in Kenya, is widely used in Rwanda, and is gaining scale in Uganda and Mozambique. It is disease-agnostic, with current use cases in HIV, cancer, chronic disease, and COVID-19 management, among other conditions. mUzima meets all WHO’s Principles of Digital Development, and its scaled implementation success has led to its recognition as a digital global public good and its listing in the WHO Digital Health Atlas. Conclusions Greater emphasis should be placed on mHealth applications that robustly extend reach of EHR systems within resource-limited settings, as opposed to siloed mHealth applications. This is particularly important given that health information exchange infrastructure is yet to mature in many LMICs. The mUzima application demonstrates how this can be done at scale, as evidenced by its adoption across multiple countries and for numerous care domains.

A Case for Higher Public Spending

Studies by psychologists, sociologists, and economists indicate that increases in incomes beyond a moderate level are not related to happiness nor significantly with the objective quality-of-life indicators (which increase with scientific and technological breakthroughs at the global level). Yet everyone wants more money. This may be explained by environmental disruption, relative-income effects, inadequate recognition of adaptation effects, and the materialistic bias due to our accumulation instinct and advertising. These factors cause a bias towards private consumption, making public spending, especially on research and environmental protection (with their long-term and global public-good nature) well below optimal. This is made worse by economists’ emphasis on the excess burden of taxation, ignoring the negative excess burden on the spending side. As Kaplow argues, if taxes are raised in accordance to the benefits of the funded public goods at the respective income levels, no disincentive effects are involved.

Remembering the commons and reinvigorating them

The Routledge Handbook of Food as a Commons proposes a normative view of what food ought to be, in the process highlighting instances where and when that potential has been actualized. Food currently is an object to sell and extract private value rather than social sustenance. This book proposes that food be reconceptualized against its long liberal and recent neoliberal history as property, making a persistent argument about decommodifying food in 24 detailed chapters. It is in re-commoning that the more than two dozen authors of the book--many of them leaders in their field--find better, alternative ideas about the right to food, global public good, food justice, and food sovereignty. They highlight how food as a commodity is currently characterized by its tradable features (appearance, calorie, price, packaging, purchasing power, taste, etc.), thereby denying its non-economic values. It asks two central questions: what would good policies look like if we build on the assumption that food should be the commons, and how do we get there?

The commons as a paradigm shift for a regenerative

As the Earth System's trajectory approaches an irreversible path towards a "Hothouse Earth", societies remain unable to collectively ensure the maintenance of a stable climate. Nearly 30 years have passed after climate change was considered a Common Concern of Humankind, a status that remains the legal framework adopted by the Paris Agreement. A stable climate is a manifestation of the stable and well-defined functioning of the Earth System. Although intangible, a stable climate exists in the real world and is necessarily a common good for being limited, exhaustible, and non-excludable. Thus, a congruent system between the rules of appropriation (negative impacts) and provision of the global public good (positive impacts) is necessary for the effective management of the common good – stable climate. However, in the current legal framework that considers a stable climate a Common Concern of Humankind, a stable climate is invisible to our international legal system and economy, which makes it impossible for it to become an object of international governance. Here, the authors argue that the recognition of a stable climate as the Common Heritage of Humankind is the first and fundamental step for being able to act towards restoring and maintaining a stable climate.

The EU’s Policies for the Green Deal Internationalization

The European Union (EU) aspires to become a global climate power. Climate neutrality became the guiding principle, the goal, and the pillar of the EU’s external policy after the Green Deal endorsement. The Green Deal is internationalized through a system of external policy instruments, including financial, trade and investment mechanisms, carbon border adjustment and emission trading, agreements with other countries, development support, and promotion of the EU’s regulation and standards through cooperation in international institutions. The normative documents and proposals on the key initiatives have been put forward, and the formats and plans for implementation are being discussed and defined. In this context, it is important to analyze the EU’s initiatives for internationalization of green transformation goals and to identify risks and opportunities related to their implementation. This article reviews the array of external policy instruments and initiatives deployed by the EU: the new trade policy of “open strategic autonomy” and the initiative on trade and sustainable development in the World Trade Organization (WTO); the framework for the screening of foreign direct investments and the taxonomy of environmentally sustainable investment and economic activity; new approaches to energy security and the building of global energy markets, including norms and standards for hydrogen markets; and the new neighbourhood policy, including the new strategy for Central Asia and the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument. Given the initial stage of the initiative’s implementation, the study focuses on the adopted documents and planned actions. The author assesses the potential impact of climate policy internationalization instruments on EU-Russia economic cooperation and on EU leadership in shaping global climate governance. The author asserts that a number of instruments bear risks for the Russian Federation’s economic projects and proposes recommendations for abating them. With regard to global governance, the EU’s commitment to integrate climate goals into the global agenda may serve as a bridge for inclusive governance. At the same time, the EU’s determination to impose its priorities through carrot and stick incentives, including through economic measures, on partners not sharing the EU’s approach may be destructive. The author concludes that the EU’s capacity to build constructive engagement with partners will be a test of the EU’s real leadership. Given that the Green Deal’s external dimension is intended not only to promote EU priorities and values, but also to advance the global public good, controversies arise with regard to the instruments, not the goals. Thus, it is in the interests of Russia, as well as other partners directly affected, not to oppose the export of the EU’s climate policy, but to cooperate to mitigate unintended consequences of its deployment and to shape inclusive global governance.

COVID-19 Vaccines as Global Common Goods: An Integrated Approach of Ethical, Economic Policy and Intellectual Property Management

The article deals with the current debate about COVID-19 Vaccines as global public/common goods. After a brief introduction on the global epidemiological and economic implication of the pandemic, the problem of the correct characterization of either vaccine or immunization/herd immunity as global public/common good, according to the necessary characteristics outlined by the pertinent economic theories, is addressed. The conclusion is that the term “global public good”/global common goods” has been extensively used in the last two years by policy makers, political leaders, academics, economists, international organizations, NGOs and others health groups, in a sort of “loose way”. Substantially, in order to underscore that equitable access to health products, including vaccines, health and biomedical technologies, medical services, medical devises, whose availability, accessibility, acceptability, affordability to the world is fundamental to tackling the pandemic. The current legal proprietary regime applied to vaccines, extensively covered by IPRs, has transformed an intrinsically non-excludable common/public good (the vaccines, due to their nature and characteristics) in something excludable and rival in consumption. Consequently, the article argues that what is needed is a swift in their legal governance. The current legal discipline of vaccines and health technologies must be changed to bring it into line with the non-excludable nature of these goods. The richest countries in the world, in pursuit of their “vaccine nationalisms”, have already collectively preordered 8.8 billion doses of vaccine, far in excess of need, thus obliging billions of people in the Global South to wait years to be vaccinated. In this respect, the article investigates the EU vaccines strategy and analyzes the Advanced Purchase Agreements signed by the European Commission with the major vaccine producers, enlightening the untenable secrecy and opacity with which the European Union’s executive has handled COVID-19 vaccine supply contracts, and how it has simply paid no more than lip-service to the concept of global common/public good by attributing a broad “private governance” to the pharmaceutical companies. Then, the various arguments, for and against, the Waiver Proposal to several sections of the WTO TRIPS agreement, introduced by India and South Africa on the TRIPS Council on October 2020, have been briefly summarized, accounting the current luck of needed consensus among the various members of the WTO. The article however describes an important number of new global and collaborative efforts already put in place by a myriad public and private actors to allow efficient development and production of vaccines in order to enhance a global access to vaccines. The article concludes by stressing the major developments in the U.S. patent’s landscape and in the Biden Administration’s attitude towards the current global health crisis, that leave hope for “extraordinary measures” to be agreed by the international community in near future. The auspice is that the time has finally arrived for the international community to develop reliable and long term solutions to tackle future global pandemic, preferably by the negotiation of a new WHO global health treaty, to secure universal fair access to essential technologies and vaccines and protecting them as global public/common goods.

Global externalities from avoided emissions in the Costa Rican cattle sector: opportunities for more efficient mitigation policies

The livestock sector has had an important contribution to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In Costa Rica, more than 20% of emissions come from beef and milk production. This paper performs a cost–benefit analysis of a climate policy in the Costa Rican cattle sector, and tries to innovate by including the positive global externality of emissions reduction into the analysis; to assess the extent to which it affects the attractivity of the referred policy. National sectorial policies for climate change mitigation generate global benefits, such as avoided GHG emissions into the atmosphere—a global public good. However, such global positive externalities, which represented 13% to 31% of the policy’s benefits in the widest scenario of our study, are usually not included in national climate planning, which may lead efficient policies to be dismissed. This paper shows that taking externalities into account makes sectorial climate mitigation policies more efficient, i.e., more appealing for investments. Benefit–cost ratios varied between 0.27 and 7.31 and break-even points average around the third and fourth years. Moreover, the results under different economic assumptions varied in terms of net benefits, but viability balance (viable vs. unviable scenarios) remained stable for different settings. The crucial question remains on how to best balance such global positive externalities to be advantageous to both funders and beneficiaries, enabling an efficient global climate mitigation strategy.