Search

Global health crises require coordination and collaboration among actors and global health agendas including health security, health promotion, and universal health coverage. This study investigated whether national public health institutes (NPHIs) unify agendas and actors, how this can be achieved, and what factors contribute to success. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 public health leaders from 18 countries in six WHO regions between 2019 and 2020. Respondents described how NPHIs bridge agendas reporting five strategies that institutes employ: serving as a trusted scientific advisor; convening actors across and within sectors; prioritizing transdisciplinary approaches; integrating public health infrastructures, and training that builds public health capacity. Findings also revealed five enabling factors critical to success: a strong legal foundation; scientific independence; public trust and legitimacy; networks and partnerships at global, national, and local levels; and stable funding. The Covid-19 pandemic underscores the urgency of securing scientific independence and promoting national institutes' responsiveness to public health challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the United Kingdom (UK) negotiates its separation from the European Union (EU), it is important to remember the public health mechanisms that are directly facilitated via our relationship with the EU. One such mechanism is the UK's role within the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Global health protection is an area that is currently experiencing an unprecedented wave of innovation, both technologically and ideologically, and we must therefore ensure that our future relationship with ECDC is one that facilitates full involvement with the global health security systems of the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) represent bold initiatives to address systematically gaps in previous efforts to assure that societies can be resilient when confronted with potentially overwhelming threats to health. Despite their obvious differences, and differing criticisms of both, they shift away from vertical (problem- or disease-specific) to horizontal (comprehensive) solutions. Despite the comprehensiveness of the SDGs, they lack a specific target for global health security. The GHSA focuses primarily on infectious diseases and neglects non-communicable diseases and socioeconomic drivers of health. Even though each agenda has limitations and unique challenges, they are complementary. We discuss ways to understand and implement the two agendas synergistically to hasten progress toward a more sustainable and resilient world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]