Assessing proposals for new global health treaties: An analytic framework

Steven J. Hoffman, John Arne Røttingen, Julio Frenk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1523-1530
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican journal of public health
Volume105
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing proposals for new global health treaties: An analytic framework'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this