Search

This paper examines the atmosphere of mistrust that permeated the response to the tenth Ebola epidemic in Eastern DRC (2018–2020). The concept of an 'atmosphere of mistrust' that we develop in this article directs attention to the elusive-yet-pervasive presence of mistrust in interactions between responders and communities during the Ebola epidemic. This analysis focuses on the popular notion that 'Ebola is a business'. Our interviewees frequently used this saying during our research on the Ebola response to explain why mistrust had emerged, how it materialized, and against whom it was directed. Based on these interviews, we examine 'Ebola is a business' as a slogan that enabled people to voice mistrust. This slogan, as we aim to show, resonated with a wider atmosphere of mistrust that governed the emergency situation in Eastern DRC. In using it, people responded to their perceptions of mistrust whilst simultaneously perpetuating and extending this atmosphere of mistrust. Our analysis of the atmosphere of mistrust highlights the power of atmospheres in governing situations, mobilizing people, and disrupting structures of discrimination. It aims to contribute to a better understanding of the barriers inhibiting the collaborations between affected communities and responders, which are required to deliver effective epidemic responses. Moreover, we argue that voice and the atmosphere are important analytics for exploring the histories of mistrust that Ebola epidemics ask for. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trade agreements influence the distribution of money, goods, services and daily living conditions – the social determinants of health and health equity, which ultimately impacts differentially on health within and between countries. In order to advance health equity as a trade policy goal, greater understanding is needed of how different actors frame their interests in order to shape government priorities, thus helping to identify competing agendas across policy communities. This paper reports on a study of how policy actors framed their interests for the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement. We analysed 88 submissions made by industry actors, not for profit organisations, unions, researchers and individual citizens to the Australian government during treaty negotiations. We show that policy actors' ideas of the purpose of trade agreements are shaped by competing underlying assumptions of the role of the state, market and society. We identify three primary framings: a dominant neoliberal market frame, and counter frames for the public interest and state sovereignty. Our analysis highlights the potential enabling and constraining impact of policy frames for health equity. In particular, the current dominant market framing largely excludes the social determinants of health and health equity. We argue that advocacy needs to tackle head on the underlying assumptions of market framings in order to open up space for the social. We identify successful examples of health framing for equity as well as opportunities for engagement with 'non-traditional' allies on shared issues of concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]