Global Health Diplomacy Research Articles

Global health

Abstract Global health emphasizes the importance of addressing health challenges that transcend national borders and require strong international collaboration and governance. This concept is grounded in collaborative transnational actions aimed at promoting health for all, reducing disparities, and protecting against threats. Strengthening health systems, public health infrastructure, improving health service delivery, and ensuring equal access to healthcare for all are key focus areas in global health. This plenary will address several major health challenges and critical issues, such as the rising burden of non-communicable diseases, re-emerging pandemics, environmental threats, and the suboptimal responses of national healthcare systems to manage these challenges. The need to focus on vulnerable and marginalized populations, particularly those affected by migration and ethnicity, will be highlighted. The discussion will also showcase the importance of including ethnic minority and Indigenous people’s perspectives in health policy and decision-making processes, as well as addressing the social determinants of health that disproportionately affect these communities. Central to the discussion on global health is the role of global health policy and diplomacy, focusing on how countries can collaborate to address health threats and challenges, shaping international strategies and frameworks. Innovation, including reverse innovation and the development of evidence-informed policies and effective public health strategies that can be implemented globally and is relevant also in resource-constrained contexts, is another critical aspect in addressing the intersection of health and development. Finally, strong public health leadership is needed to shape practices and policies, as well as fostering the next generation of global health leaders. The multifaceted nature of global health calls for a comprehensive approach to health—one that integrates policy, leadership, and equity into the core of public health strategies. The integration of health into all policies at the global level is vital for creating supportive environments, policies, services, and communications that promote better health for all. Moderators Iveta Nagyova President EUPHA Henrique Barros President ASPHER Speakers/Panellists Emma Rawson Te Patu President World Federation of Public Health Associations Charles Agyemang Professor of Global Migration, Ethnicity & Health, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands Agnès Buzyn Former Minister of Health and Social Affairs, France Moredreck Chibi Public Health Innovation Lead, WHO Regional Office for Europe

Improving struggling medical and nursing students’ subjective vitality, school engagement and academic performance through a peer mentorship intervention programme: an intervention protocol

BackgroundThe undergraduate medical training programme is demanding and rigorous. This underlines the importance of a peer mentorship strategy to improve the well-being, self-determination, school connectedness, and performance of struggling medical and nursing students. This study is aimed at identifying struggling medical and nursing students using two cumulative continuous assessment test (CAT) scores, assess their subjective vitality and school engagement and evaluate the impact of the peer mentorship intervention on them.MethodsThe study will adopt a mixed-methods approach and will be conducted in the medical colleges of Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria, and the University of Rwanda. Three instruments will be used: The subjective Vitality Scale (SVS), the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI), and the academic records of the students before and after the commencement of the intervention programme. The consenting least-performing medical and nursing students identified by their low CAT scores (below 45%) in basic medical sciences will be selected for study in each institution. The outcome measures will include students’ CAT scores, subjective vitality, and school engagement scores. The data will be analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Thematic content analysis will be adopted in the analysis of the responses generated from the focus group discussion. The mean ± standard deviation or median and interquartile range statistic will be adopted for the quantitative data.DiscussionGiven the paucity of data on struggling medical and nursing students in Nigeria and Rwanda, this research was designed to help in exploring evidence-based interventions to improve and prevent poor subjective well-being of struggling students. The study is expected to fill these knowledge gaps. Trial registration: Pan African Clinical Trial registry, PACTR202405546896613, registration date: 27th May, 2024. This proposal has been supported by grant 1R25TW011217 from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH)/Fogarty International Center (FIC) which also includes co-funds from the U.S. Department of State’s Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and Health Diplomacy (S/GAC) and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to the African Forum for Research and Education in Health (AFREhealth). The Grant Principal Investigators are Profs. Nelson K.Sewankambo (contact PI), Prisca Adejumo, Jean Bisimwa Nachega, Fatima Suleman.

Analysis of Leadership Skills in Global Health Diplomacy: A Study of International Health Attachés at the Dubai Health Authority in the United Arab Emirates

Analysis of Leadership Skills in Global Health Diplomacy: A Study of International Health Attachés at the Dubai Health Authority in the United Arab Emirates

Political Prioritization of Access to Medicines and Right to Health: Need for an Effective Global Health Governance Through Global Health Diplomacy Comment on "More Pain, More Gain! The Delivery of COVID-19 Vaccines and the Pharmaceutical Industry’s Role in Widening the Access Gap"

Borges and colleagues’ article entitled "More Pain, More Gain! The Delivery of COVID-19 Vaccines and the Pharmaceutical Industry’s Role in Widening the Access Gap," analyzes the role of pharmaceutical companies in providing equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines. They concluded that with the failure of COVID-19 Vaccine Global Access (COVAX), the health gaps have widened due to the profit-driven pharmaceutical sector. In this commentary, we highlight the role of COVAX and its attempt to bridge some access gaps since its inception and the need for reforms in policy-making and global health governance. The commentary highlights the role of global health diplomacy in promoting equity and negotiating the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) waiver for COVID-19 vaccines at the World Trade Organization (WTO) thereby promoting global solidarity, global partnerships, access to medicine and health products, and the right to health. We conclude that political prioritization is the key to balance the impact of profit-driven pharma industry and addressing the needs of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Political prioritization for digital health and health equity through global health diplomacy.

Political prioritization for digital health and health equity through global health diplomacy.

Indonesia Interest toward G20 Pandemic Fund: Global Health Diplomacy Perspective

In the last three years, during the COVID-19 pandemic shocks, the discussion for economic recovery and global health development agenda prevailed. To date, the discussion has shifted from recovery to more extensive moves such as strengthen the current global health architecture. Specifically, prepare for the next pandemic and reduce potential risks. Countries around the world are interested in this topic and the Group of Twenty (G20), the premier economic forum summit, also focuses on this issue. This kind of “global crisis responder” experience drives the interesting discussion, how did the COVID-19 crisis respond by the G20? Answering this question, during Indonesia's G20 Presidency, the Pandemic Fund was formally introduced in collaboration with the Pandemic Fund secretariat, marked by a significant event during the G20 Joint Finance and Health Ministers’ Meeting. The rationale behind establishing this fund arose from the challenges faced by low and middle-income nations in securing adequate funding for their healthcare systems amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Depart from that, this significant achievement of the pandemic fund launching raises questions, why Indonesia has an agenda for Pandemic Fund during its presidency? This paper aims to answer this question with the framework of global health diplomacy.

China's Health Diplomacy Strategy During COVID-19 Crisis 2020-2022

In time of crisis like COVID-19 outbreak, China’s health diplomacy has become a spotlight in terms of its international momentum in dealing the virus. This research is important to know how health diplomacy can be used as an effective foreign policy. The research question in this paper asks how did China conduct health diplomacy during the COVID-19 crisis from 2020 to 2022. This research used descriptive and literature research methods by collecting secondary data from related research and international organization, WHO, as main source for COVID-19 data. The data were analyzed using neoclassical realism theory. Not to mention, there is not much literature that analyzes China's before until the recent "New Normal" situation. When COVID-19 emerge, it simultaneously transforms its health diplomacy into vaccine diplomacy that begins from the first outbreak of the virus. It underwent scrutiny and criticism from other countries as they were sceptical about whether it is purely on conducting global health diplomacy or China's way of promoting a strategic framework. It also has a clear intention that its action is also to appease the world view toward its role since the virus is from Wuhan, a city in China. This research concludes international system can affect state behaviour toward its relations with other countries by examining China's health diplomacy. Keywords: China’s Foreign Policy, Global Health Diplomacy, Vaccine Diplomacy

Bilateral health agreements of South Africa: an analysis of issues covered.

The bilateral agreements signed between South Africa and countries in Southern and Eastern Africa are a rare example of efforts to regulate health-related issues in a world region. As far as we know, there are no comparable bilateral health governance mechanisms in regions elsewhere. Furthermore, the rapidly growing literature on global health governance and governance for global health has to date not addressed the issue of patient mobility and how to govern it. In this study, we examine the issues included in these agreements, highlight key issues that they address, identify areas of omission and provide recommendations for improvement. This analysis should inform the development of such governance agreements both in Southern Africa and in regions elsewhere. We obtained 13 bilateral health agreements between South Africa and 11 neighbouring African countries as part of a broader research project examining the impact on health systems of patient mobility in South Africa, and thematically analysed their content and the governance mechanisms described. The agreements appear to be solidarity mechanisms between neighbouring countries. They contain considerable content on health diplomacy, with little on health governance, management and delivery. Nonetheless, given what they do and do not address, and how, they provide a rare insight into mechanisms of global health diplomacy and attempts to address patient mobility and other health-related issues in practice. The agreements appear to be global health diplomacy mechanisms expressing solidarity, emerging from a post-apartheid period, but with little detail of issues covered, and a range of important issues not addressed. Further empirical work is required to understand what these documents mean, particularly in the Covid-19 context, and to understand challenges with their implementation. The documents also raise the need for particular study of bilateral flows and experience of patients and health workers, and how this relates to health system strengthening.

The World Health Organization was born as a normative agency: Seventy-five years of global health law under WHO governance.

The World Health Organization (WHO) was born as a normative agency and has looked to global health law to structure collective action to realize global health with justice. Framed by its constitutional authority to act as the directing and coordinating authority on international health, WHO has long been seen as the central actor in the development and implementation of global health law. However, WHO has faced challenges in advancing law to prevent disease and promote health over the past 75 years, with global health law constrained by new health actors, shifting normative frameworks, and soft law diplomacy. These challenges were exacerbated amid the COVID-19 pandemic, as states neglected international legal commitments in national health responses. Yet, global health law reforms are now underway to strengthen WHO governance, signaling a return to lawmaking for global health. Looking back on WHO's 75th anniversary, this article examines the central importance of global health law under WHO governance, reviewing the past successes, missed opportunities, and future hopes for WHO. For WHO to meet its constitutional authority to become the normative agency it was born to be, we offer five proposals to reestablish a WHO fit for purpose: normative instruments, equity and human rights mainstreaming, sustainable financing, One Health, and good governance. Drawing from past struggles, these reforms will require further efforts to revitalize hard law authorities in global health, strengthen WHO leadership across the global governance landscape, uphold equity and rights at the center of global health law, and expand negotiations in global health diplomacy.

Exploring Phytochemicals for Diabetes Management: Mechanisms, Efficacy, and Future Directions

In the realm of global health diplomacy, diabetes mellitus undoubtedly poses a significant challenge. Furthermore, there is a pressing need to explore alternative and complementary therapies. Phytochemicals, which are naturally occurring bioactive compounds found in plants, exhibit distinct biochemical properties, rendering them promising candidates for diabetes management. This review focuses on the potential of various classes of phytochemicals, including polyphenols, alkaloids, terpenoids, organosulfur compounds, and polysaccharides, in diabetes management. Each class demonstrates unique mechanisms of action, contributing to therapeutic effects such as enhancing insulin sensitivity, reducing carbohydrate digestion and glucose absorption, regulating antioxidant stress, inflammation, and glucose metabolism. While successful preclinical trials provide valuable insights, further rigorous clinical trials are imperative to ascertain the therapeutic efficacy, optimal dosage, bioavailability, and potential interactions with concomitant medications. Understanding the functional pathways of plant-derived substances is crucial, as it enables the formulation of precise strategies for incorporating them as dietary supplements for individuals with diabetes mellitus. Keywords: Phytochemicals, diabetes mellitus, insulin sensitivity, glucose metabolism, oxidative stress, and inflammation.

Pandemic treaty as an instrument to strengthen global health security: Global health diplomacy at its crux.

The World Health Assembly (WHA), on 1st December 2021, unanimously agreed to launch a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement, or other international instrument under the World Health Organization's (WHO's) constitution to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. We aimed to explore the role of global health diplomacy (GHD) in pandemic treaty negotiations by providing deep insight into the ongoing drafting process under the WHO leadership. We conducted a narrative review by searching Scopus, Web of Sciences, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar search engine using the keywords "Pandemic Treaty," OR "International Health Regulations," OR "International conventions," OR "International treaties" in the context of recent COVID-19 pandemic. Besides, we included articles recommending the need for GHD, leadership and governance mechanisms for this international treaty drafting approved by the WHA. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of GHD bolstered the international system and remained high on the agendas of many national, regional and global platforms. As per Article 19 of the WHO constitution, the Assembly established an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate this convention/ agreement to protect the world from disease outbreaks of pandemic potential. Since GHD has helped to strengthen international cooperation in health systems and address inequities in achieving health-related global targets, there is a great scope for the successful drafting of this pandemic treaty. The pandemic treaty is a defining moment in global health governance, particularly the pandemic governance reforms. However, the treaty's purpose will only be served if the equity considerations are optimized, accountability mechanisms are established, and a sense of shared responsibility is embraced. While fulfilling treaty commitments might be complex and challenging, it provides an opportunity to rethink and build resilient systems for pandemic preparedness and response in the future.

The rise of India's global health diplomacy amid COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of global health diplomacy (GHD), with India emerging as a key player. India's commitment to GHD is demonstrated by its active participation in regional and multilateral projects, pharmaceutical expertise, and large-scale manufacturing capabilities, which include the production and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines and essential medicines. India has supported nations in need through bilateral and multilateral platforms, providing vaccines to countries experiencing shortages and offering technical assistance and capacity-building programs to improve healthcare infrastructure and response capabilities. India's unique approach to GHD, rooted in humanitarian diplomacy, emphasized collaboration and empathy and stressed the well-being of humanity by embracing the philosophy of "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam," which translates to "the world is one family." Against this background, this paper's main focus is to analyze the rise of India's GHD amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and its leadership in addressing various global challenges. India has demonstrated its commitment to global solidarity by offering medical supplies, equipment, and expertise to more than 100 countries. India's rising global leadership can be attributed to its proactive approach, humanitarian diplomacy, and significant contributions to global health initiatives.

Diplomatic Partnership Building and Transformation of China-Middle East Health Cooperation

China’s foreign health cooperation has evolved from health aid to health partnership with the advent of global health diplomacy. Particularly since the start of the new era, China has planned forward in the area of health cooperation, strengthening the connections with its entire diplomatic approach and taking a more active part in the world health community. This paper examines the distinctions between conventional aid and health partnerships using the cooperation between China and the Middle East as an illustration. It also traces the development of the health partnership network between China and the Middle East through sectorial collaboration, humanistic exchanges, institutional building, and mutual policy appreciation. Using the two sides’ cooperation in the face of the COVID-19 outbreak as an example, it evaluates the effects of cooperation on regional health governance and diplomatic relations. It is considered that there has been a favorable contact between China and Middle Eastern nations in terms of health cooperation.

The effect of Chinese vaccine diplomacy during COVID-19 in the Philippines and Vietnam: a multiple case study from a soft power perspective

Vaccine diplomacy is a subset of global health diplomacy and refers to the use and delivery of vaccines to achieve a country’s global health goals and foreign policy objectives. Countries have used vaccine diplomacy to increase their soft power during the COVID-19 pandemic. China, an emerging world power, was no exception in this trend. By December 2022, China had dispatched 1.65 billion vaccines worldwide; approximately one-third of the Chinese vaccines were sent to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. China attempted to increase its soft power via vaccine diplomacy to appeal to its neighbours with which it has long-standing territorial disputes in the South China Sea (SCS). Focusing on two key claimants in the SCS, our study has the following research question: How effective was Chinese COVID-19 vaccine diplomacy in the Philippines and Vietnam from a soft power perspective? Through a qualitative multiple case study research design, we determined the effectiveness of Chinese vaccine diplomacy in the Philippines and Vietnam by using four indicators of soft power: public opinion, foreign policy, attractiveness, and business and trade. Data collection consisted of a literature search of academic literature and newspaper articles that were published between 26 May and 13 June 2022. A thematic analysis was conducted to analyse the data. Analysing the effectiveness of Chinese vaccine diplomacy based on the four indicators of soft power, our results show that only the indicators of attractiveness in Vietnam and business and trade in the Philippines have somewhat improved. In contrast, the indicators of public opinion and foreign policy showed neutral or negative results for China. This study concludes that Chinese vaccine diplomacy in the Philippines and Vietnam during the COVID-19 pandemic was unsuccessful from a soft power perspective. One reason is that China undermined its soft power approach by simultaneously using hard power tactics in Southeast Asia. Using vaccine diplomacy to increase soft power is not always desirable from a global health perspective. Instead, countries should focus on equitable vaccine access and address asymmetrical power relations.

Biden Hears a WHO

The World Health Organization (WHO), the body charged with implementing global pandemic response, figured heavily in the Republican and Democratic campaigns of the 2020 US presidential election. The contrast was stark: Donald Trump drew on and ramped up dissatisfaction with the United Nations system in general and the WHO in particular, culminating in his decision to pull the US out of the WHO in the middle of the pandemic, while Joe Biden rescinded the decision to leave the WHO the day after assuming the presidency. Despite this difference, neither party heeded renewed calls during COVID to put health justice and primary healthcare at the heart of global health policy. Both parties continued to prefer private philanthropic sources of funding for global vaccine initiatives, and both sought economic returns on vaccine development, potentially missing a rare opportunity to incorporate global health justice into US global health diplomacy.

Global Health Diplomacy and Commodified Health Care: Health Tourism in Malaysia and Thailand

Global Health Diplomacy and Commodified Health Care: Health Tourism in Malaysia and Thailand

Opportunities for Global Health Diplomacy in Transnational Robotic Telesurgery

Opportunities for Global Health Diplomacy in Transnational Robotic Telesurgery

The FIFA World Cup as a Tool for Global Health Diplomacy

AbstractInternational football competitions like the Continental Championships, Leagues, and World Cup serve as the focal point of large‐scale tournaments with an international scope. With specialized local representatives serving as diplomatic envoys, they can represent interests, beliefs, and history across boundaries. The advancement of world health can also be reflected in this representation. Football can play a crucial role in accomplishing various health goals by raising audience knowledge and encouraging behavioral and lifestyle changes. The World Cup may provide a platform for increased interest in the potential for global health diplomacy. A systems approach is needed to contextualize international soccer within the reality of global health. The World Cup for Health's diplomacy should negotiate with stakeholders and oversee their interactions to provide initiatives and activities that support the globally shared and aligned viewpoint on health outcomes. This article seeks to provide a long‐lasting framework for effectively using the Fédération Internationale de Football Association World Cup, an enormously popular sporting event, as a diplomatic instrument for promoting global health.

Mapping capacity building programs in health diplomacy: Relevance and application in an uncertain world.

Background: Health diplomacy is one of the emerging avenues for academics where foreign policy dynamics and global health meet. Its relevance has augmented especially after the COVID-19 pandemic that brought the world to a halt. International organization and national entities that are responsible for health governance as well as its socio-economic determinants have been increasingly involved in the negotiations for a collective action towards a better health infrastructure and preparedness. However, the approach to health diplomacy seems to vary with whether health is looked through diplomacy lens or vice versa. Thus, inculcating adequate and appropriate competencies of both fields to conduct negotiations for health while keeping national interests and international commitments intact is imperative. Methods: This study investigates 50 programmes/courses that have been currently offered around the globe to understand the competencies that have been identified as essential for a health diplomat. We examined four aspects: i) geographical distribution of programme/course (ii) the type of global health diplomacy programme being offered and their duration (iii) mode of teaching and (iv) cross-cutting themes that the programme offers. Results: We found that the courses/programmes have been mostly provided by the countries of the Global North who play a key part in international negotiations. Although there were diverse types of certifications identified, they can be classified into two groups - core health diplomacy and inclusive health diplomacy programmes. The health diplomacy training is preferred to be provided in-person due to the nature of the work. Conclusions: While competencies for health governance and international relation have been dominant among the current programmes, other cross-cutting themes such as economics, politics, law, public policy, crisis management, environment and public health have been considered essential. The article concludes with a proposal of a framework to streamline the sectors and the competencies that is required in health diplomats.

Strategi Indonesia Dalam Menangani Pandemi Covid-19 Melalui Foreign Policy and Global Health Initiatives Tahun 2020

<p><em>Health diplomacy is carried out by various countries in the world to overcome the Covid-19 pandemic, especially Indonesia through Foreign Policy and Global Health (FPGH) Initiatives by 2020. The concept of global health diplomacy and health security is used to analyze the research problem. The method used in this research is descriptive qualitative using three stages of data analysis, namely data condensation, data presentation, and conclusion drawing and verification. The results shows that the diplomacy carried out by Indonesia through FPGH in 2020 aims to create affordable health access and ensure the availability of vaccines as one of the steps to accelerate the pandemic. Covid-19 consciously increases the ability of countries to collaborate in dealing with the impact of inequality and gap by involving multilateral cooperation as the main factor in realizing health security. These activities are demonstrated through international meetings such as the UN General Assembly, WHO, WHA, and ASEAN and involve the COVAX Facility to ensure fair and equal distribution of vaccines.</em><em></em></p>