Soft power and global health: the sustainable development goals (SDGs) era health agendas of the G7, G20 and BRICS.

BRICS G20 G7 Global health agenda-setting Global health diplomacy Soft power Sustainable development goals

Journal

BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
24 Jun 2019
Historique:
received: 04 10 2018
accepted: 05 06 2019
entrez: 26 6 2019
pubmed: 27 6 2019
medline: 4 9 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In 2017, the G20 health ministers convened for the first time to discuss global health and issued a communiqué outlining their health priorities, as the BRICS and G7 have done for years. As these political clubs hold considerable political and economic influence, their respective global health agendas may influence both global health priorities and the priorities of other countries and actors. Given the rising salience of global health in global summitry, we analyzed the health ministerial communiqués issued by the BRICS, G7 and G20 after the SDGs were adopted in 2015. We compared the stated health priorities of the BRICS, G7 and G20 against one another and against the targets of SDG 3 on health, using a traffic light system to assess the quality of their commitments. With regard to the SDG 3 targets, the BRICS, G7 and G20 priorities overlapped in their focus on emergency preparedness and universal health coverage, but diverged in areas of environmental pollution, mental health, and maternal and child health. Health issues with considerable associated burdens of disease, including substance use, road traffic injuries and sexual health, were missing from the agendas of all three political clubs. In terms of SDG 3 principles and ways of working, the BRICS, G7 and G20 varied in their emphasis on human rights, equity and engagement with non-state actors, but all expressed their explicit commitment to Agenda 2030. The leadership of BRICS, G7 and G20 on global health is welcome. However, their relatively narrow focus on the potential impact of ill-health primarily in relation to the economy and trade may not be sufficiently comprehensive to achieve the Agenda 2030 vision of promoting health equity and leaving no-one behind. Recommendations for the BRICS, G7 and G20 based on this analysis include: 1) expanding focus to the neglected SDG 3 health targets; 2) placing greater emphasis on upstream determinants of health; 3) greater commitment to equity and leaving no-one behind; 4) adopting explicit commitments to rights-based approaches; and 5) making commitments that are of higher quality and which include time-bound quantitative targets and clear accountability mechanisms.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In 2017, the G20 health ministers convened for the first time to discuss global health and issued a communiqué outlining their health priorities, as the BRICS and G7 have done for years. As these political clubs hold considerable political and economic influence, their respective global health agendas may influence both global health priorities and the priorities of other countries and actors.
METHODS METHODS
Given the rising salience of global health in global summitry, we analyzed the health ministerial communiqués issued by the BRICS, G7 and G20 after the SDGs were adopted in 2015. We compared the stated health priorities of the BRICS, G7 and G20 against one another and against the targets of SDG 3 on health, using a traffic light system to assess the quality of their commitments.
RESULTS RESULTS
With regard to the SDG 3 targets, the BRICS, G7 and G20 priorities overlapped in their focus on emergency preparedness and universal health coverage, but diverged in areas of environmental pollution, mental health, and maternal and child health. Health issues with considerable associated burdens of disease, including substance use, road traffic injuries and sexual health, were missing from the agendas of all three political clubs. In terms of SDG 3 principles and ways of working, the BRICS, G7 and G20 varied in their emphasis on human rights, equity and engagement with non-state actors, but all expressed their explicit commitment to Agenda 2030.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The leadership of BRICS, G7 and G20 on global health is welcome. However, their relatively narrow focus on the potential impact of ill-health primarily in relation to the economy and trade may not be sufficiently comprehensive to achieve the Agenda 2030 vision of promoting health equity and leaving no-one behind. Recommendations for the BRICS, G7 and G20 based on this analysis include: 1) expanding focus to the neglected SDG 3 health targets; 2) placing greater emphasis on upstream determinants of health; 3) greater commitment to equity and leaving no-one behind; 4) adopting explicit commitments to rights-based approaches; and 5) making commitments that are of higher quality and which include time-bound quantitative targets and clear accountability mechanisms.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31234831
doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7114-5
pii: 10.1186/s12889-019-7114-5
pmc: PMC6591917
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

815

Références

Lancet. 2007 Apr 21;369(9570):1373-1378
pubmed: 17448824
Int J Drug Policy. 2008 Dec;19(6):467-78
pubmed: 19038724
PLoS Med. 2010 Apr 20;7(4):e1000232
pubmed: 20421917
Global Health. 2012 Jun 11;8:14
pubmed: 22686126
Bull World Health Organ. 2013 Mar 1;91(3):159-159A
pubmed: 23476084
Health Policy Plan. 2014 Sep;29(6):763-73
pubmed: 24072881
Global Health. 2014 Jun 05;10:44
pubmed: 24903332
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Jun 1;92(6):463-4
pubmed: 24940025
BMJ. 2015 Mar 05;350:h1210
pubmed: 25744556
Global Health. 2015 Mar 21;11:13
pubmed: 25890267
J Med Econ. 2016;19(1):70-6
pubmed: 26366470
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016 Apr;23(7):6376-89
pubmed: 26620862
Lancet. 2017 Jul 15;390(10091):324-332
pubmed: 28139255
PLoS Med. 2017 Apr 25;14(4):e1002285
pubmed: 28441387
Lancet. 2017 Jul 15;390(10091):214
pubmed: 28721866
Indian J Public Health. 2017 Apr-Jun;61(2):134-136
pubmed: 28721965
Lancet. 2017 Sep 16;390(10100):1423-1459
pubmed: 28916366
Emerg Infect Dis. 2017 Dec;23(13):
pubmed: 29155676
Glob Public Health. 2019 Apr;14(4):584-599
pubmed: 29697307
Bull World Health Organ. 2018 May 1;96(5):355-359
pubmed: 29875520

Auteurs

Bronwyn McBride (B)

Interdisciplinary Studies Graduate Program, University of British Columbia, 270, 2357 Main Mall, H. R. MacMillan Building, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.

Sarah Hawkes (S)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. s.hawkes@ucl.ac.uk.

Kent Buse (K)

Strategic Policy Directions, UNAIDS, Avenue Appia 20, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH