Open AccessAssessing Proposals for New Global Health Treaties: An Analytic Framework
Author(s) -
Steven J. Hoffman,
John Arne Røttingen,
Julio Frenk
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
american journal of public health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.284
H-Index - 264
eISSN - 1541-0048
pISSN - 0090-0036
DOI - 10.2105/ajph.2015.302726
Subject(s) - dimension (graph theory) , global health , political science , law and economics , mechanism (biology) , law , sociology , mathematics , epistemology , health care , pure mathematics , philosophy
We have presented an analytic framework and 4 criteria for assessing when global health treaties have reasonable prospects of yielding net positive effects. First, there must be a significant transnational dimension to the problem being addressed. Second, the goals should justify the coercive nature of treaties. Third, proposed global health treaties should have a reasonable chance of achieving benefits. Fourth, treaties should be the best commitment mechanism among the many competing alternatives. Applying this analytic framework to 9 recent calls for new global health treaties revealed that none fully meet the 4 criteria. Efforts aiming to better use or revise existing international instruments may be more productive than is advocating new treaties.