Suchergebnisse

Amid a global health crisis, the process for declaring a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) is at a crossroads. As a formal declaration by the World Health Organization, a PHEIC is governed by clear legislation as to what is, and what is not, deemed a global health security threat. However, it has become increasingly politicised, and the legal criteria now appear to be secondary to the political motivation or outcome of the announcement. Addressing multiple empirical case studies, including COVID-19, this multidisciplinary book explores the relationship between international law and international relations to interrogate how a PHEIC is declared and its role in how we collectively respond to outbreaks.

Addressing multiple empirical case studies, including COVID-19, this multidisciplinary book explores the relationship between international law and international relations to interrogate how a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) is declared and its role in how we collectively respond to outbreaks.

Intro -- Contents -- Introduction -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Themes -- 3 Lucky All the Time: Addressing the Challenges of Infectious Disease -- References -- Applying Lessons from the Past in Haiti: Cholera, Scientific Knowledge, and the Longest-Standing Principle of International Health Law -- 1 Introduction (of Cholera) -- 2 Cholera Comes to Haiti -- 3 The Germ of an Idea: Cholera and the First International Sanitary Conference -- 4 The Science of Cholera -- 5 The Conventional Approach: The First International Sanitary Conventions -- 6 Spreading to a New Host: The WHO and the International Health Regulations -- 7 Going Global: The Revised International Health Regulations (2005) -- 8 The Disease Spreads: Other Treaties and Frameworks -- 9 Commerce and Cholera -- 10 Cholera in Customary International Law -- 11 Cholera and the UN -- 12 Haiti: The Largest Single-Country Cholera Epidemic in a Century -- 13 Conclusion -- References -- Responding to Health Emergencies: The Ethical and Legal Considerations for Militaries -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Military Health Assistance -- 3 Legal Considerations of Military Assistance in Health Emergencies -- 3.1 IASC Global Health Cluster Provisional Guidelines -- 3.2 The Oslo and MCDA Guidelines -- 4 Ethical Considerations of Military Assistance in Health Emergencies -- 4.1 Do no Harm -- 4.2 Humanity and Military Motivations -- 4.3 Impartiality and Justice -- 5 Conclusion -- References -- The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement Response to the West African Ebola Outbreak 2014 -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Red Cross and Red Crescent Mandate -- 3 Ebola Outbreak 2014 -- 4 The Role of the WHO in Coordinating a Medical Humanitarian Response -- 5 WHO and Ebola 2014-2016 -- 6 The UN Relationship with Other Actors, Including the IFRC -- 7 The IFRC Response -- 8 Conclusion -- References.

AbstractAccess and benefit sharing (ABS) is a transactional mechanism designed to allow countries to trade access to their sovereign genetic resources for monetary and non-monetary benefits, with the ultimate goal of channelling those benefits into sustainable development and environmental conservation. Arguments about how pathogens are not the sort of genetic resources the world ought to conserve eventually gave way to a recognition that pathogens are indeed sovereign genetic resources under the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Nagoya Protocol, and that the ABS transaction may be an effective way to deliver scarce vaccines to developing nations as benefits received in exchange for shared pathogen samples. This article argues that categorising vaccines as benefits given in exchange for access to pathogen samples creates opposing incentives for providers and users of virus samples and undermines the human right to health because it makes that right a commodity to be bought. The provision of pathogen samples to the global research commons and the fair and equitable distribution of medicines should be two parallel public goods to be pursued as goals in and of themselves. We conclude that the linking of these goals through the ABS transaction should be reassessed.

POLICY POINTS: Equitable access to a COVID‐19 vaccine in all countries remains a key policy objective, but experience of previous pandemics suggests access will be limited in developing countries, despite the rapid development of three successful vaccine candidates. The COVAX Facility seeks to address this important issue, but the prevalence of vaccine nationalism threatens to limit the ability of the facility to meet both its funding targets and its ambitious goals for vaccine procurement. A failure to adequately address the underlying lack of infrastructure in developing countries threatens to further limit the success of the COVAX Facility. CONTEXT: Significant effort has been directed toward developing a COVID‐19 vaccine, which is viewed as the route out of the pandemic. Much of this effort has coalesced around COVAX, the multilateral initiative aimed at accelerating the development of COVID‐19 vaccines, and ensuring they are equitably available in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). This paper represents the first significant analysis of COVAX, and the extent to which it can be said to have successfully met these aims. METHODS: This paper draws on the publicly available policy documents made available by the COVAX initiatives, as well as position papers and public statements from governments around the world with respect to COVID‐19 vaccines and equitable access. We analyze the academic literature regarding access to vaccines during the H1N1 pandemic. Finally, we consider the WHO Global Allocation System, and its principles, which are intended to guide COVAX vaccine deployment. FINDINGS: We argue that the funding mechanism deployed by the COVAX Pillar appears to be effective at fostering at‐risk investments in research and development and the production of doses in advance of confirmation of clinical efficacy, but caution that this represents a win‐win situation for vaccine manufacturers, providing them with opportunity to benefit regardless of whether their vaccine candidate ever goes on to gain ...