Mark Eccleston-Turner
It is unsurprising that equity has featured so prominently in the Pandemic Treaty negotiations – the Treaty is a direct response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which was characterised by gross inequality between high-income and LMICs. For all the talk at the start of the Treaty negotiation process of equity, of doing things differently in the future, it appears that very little will change. If it works, and there are very good reasons to believe that it will not work, it will at best make sure that a small proportion of vaccines end up where they need to be, and the rest will continue to go to the highest bidder, regardless of need, equity, or justice.
Continue reading >>
Helmut Philipp Aust, Felix Schott
While the majority of the contributions to this blog symposium tackle issues of global justice, distributive justice and the impact of a decolonial perspective on global health law, our approach might seem to stand out at first sight: Our contribution is interested in the legal form the new Pandemic Agreement will take. Attention to the formal dimension of the reform process might seem remote from the substantive issues of the other contributions. However, we would like to argue in this short piece that the decision for a certain legal architecture can very well have repercussions on the question to what extent the new instrument can deliver on its promise to pursue equity and hence to arguably overcome divisions still entrenched in the international community.
Continue reading >>
Mehrdad Payandeh, Tina Stavrinaki
States parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination must improve their public health systems by measurably advancing racial equality in law and in practice. As the world moves forward in understanding the structural dimension of racial discrimination in all areas of life, the General Recommendation No. 37 on racial discrimination in the enjoyment of the right to health can serve as a quasi-global instrument towards a more equitable and inclusive landscape for the realization of the right to health for all.
Continue reading >>
Fatou Sillah, Andreas Fischer-Lescano
The coronavirus pandemic has once again shown that scarcity and distribution are political problems. It is only through distribution that resources, finite in principle, are separated into scarce and non-scarce goods. So how can this unfair distribution of resources be countered?
Continue reading >>
Lilli Hasche
Many stakeholders agree that the WHO has not been able to adequately address the political and social problems, global health emergencies triggered or exacerbated by epidemics and pandemics, malnutrition, and access to clean water in recent years. Against this backdrop, there is a widespread call for more equity and solidarity in the global health system. Most of the proposals concerning the reform of the WHO deal with the possible goals and outcomes of such a reform. However, it is just as important to consider how such a reform should be carried out so that the ambitious goals are not compromised by the implementation process itself.
Continue reading >>
Anne Peters
The projected WHO Pandemic Agreement, as currently under negotiation, will most likely contain a detailed prescription of a One Health approach (Art. 1(d) and Art. 5 of the INB negotiating text of 30 October 2023). This contribution examines the legal potential of a One Health approach for laws and policies towards animals raised, kept, and slaughtered for providing meat, milk, fur, and other body products for human consumption. My main argument will be that, taken seriously, the idea of One health defies a hierarchy between the health of humans, animals, and ecosystems. The inner logic of One Health is to exploit the positive feedback loops between safeguarding human, animal, and ecosystem health. This approach should modify the still prevailing unreflected and unchecked prioritisation of measures in favour of human health at the expense of and to the detriment of animal health and life. I will illustrate my claim with two policy examples.
Continue reading >>
Adam Strobeyko
The sharing of pathogen samples and their associated genetic sequence data (GSD) is crucial for global pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. It enables global surveillance, risk assessment and the research and development of pandemic-related products. The sharing of related benefits is also seen as key to ensuring more equitable global access to the fruits of science. These issues, collectively known as Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS), remain a major point of contention in the ongoing Pandemic Agreement negotiations. In this post, I explore potential scenarios regarding the establishment or absence of the new PABS System, and their implications under international law.
Continue reading >>
Jelena von Achenbach
Since at least the 1980s, private actors and market-based mechanisms have played an increasingly important role in the provision of public goods and services and the pursuit of public policy objectives in general. A market approach is also widely used in the field of public health. In effect, the PPP approach, as illustrated by COVAX, can work to structurally protect the interests of (a majority) of the high-income countries. While PPPs in global health may do a lot of good things, their private law, contractualist nature and structures safeguard formal state sovereignty and voluntarism, predominantly benefitting high-income donor countries
Continue reading >>
Tine Hanrieder, Julian Eckl
In their latest ‘WHO transformation’ (which began in 2017), the WHO hired at least six consulting firms, praised by the Director-General as the ‘best firms in the world’. Despite their prominent role in WHO processes and reform efforts, there is a clear accountability gap in their role at WHO. Consultant engagement contributes to a trend towards informal governance and public-private collusions in an organization that looks less and less like a public authority.
Continue reading >>
Anna Holzscheiter
With an estimated 6,9 million deaths and with its enormous scale of economic, social and political collateral damages, the COVID-19 Pandemic has created excessive momentum for re-considering the rules and procedures governing global health – or has it? In this blog contribution, I will discuss the promises and pitfalls of current law-making and law-amending efforts that seek to strengthen pandemic governance post COVID-19 by reflecting on three distinct features of global health as an area of international cooperation.
Continue reading >>
Lilli Hasche, Jelena von Achenbach, Andreas Fischer-Lescano
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed systemic problems in the global health system. It revealed that the global health system perpetuates global health inequalities rather than effectively reducing them: The international community, particularly the countries of the Global North, failed to make COVID-19 vaccines widely available to the populations of the world's poorest countries. This blog debate takes stock of the reform debate about a just and decolonizing transformation of the health system. Bringing together scholars from various disciplines, the contributions of this debate ask what a fair global health system could look like and what role the law plays in it.
Continue reading >>
