Search

Abdel Omran's epidemiological transition theory has become a convenient heuristic device for explaining shifts in the global distribution of disease. In turn, the temporal and geographic transition from "pandemics of infection" to "degenerative and man-made diseases" (Omran 1971, 161) as countries develop has become part of the mythology of global health. Such myths are powerful not because they are necessarily clearly true or false, but rather for what they naturalize or oversimplify (Essebro 2018). Drawing on the example of the work undertaken over the past three decades to ensure the prioritization of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) as a problem of and for development within global health agendas, I draw on documentary and interview data to examine the origins and residual power of myths. Within this field, geographic myths (see Blaut 2006) about the social, economic, and spatial distribution of morbidity and mortality are a pervasive and persistent challenge for advocates trying to emphasize the threat of NCDs to the Global South. In examining the myth work undertaken by advocates, this article offers novel geographic perspectives to the critical global health field, while also arguing for the centrality of global health to geography as a discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are a complex category composed of five diseases and five behavioural and environmental risk factors. These are, in turn, represented by multiple constituencies and communities of expertise and interest. This fractured landscape is evidenced by and magnified through an abject lack of conferences devoted to the category of NCDs. One of the very few is the NCD Alliance Forum, most recently held in February 2020 in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. With the first Forum held in 2015 and another in 2017, these events offer powerful insight into the key actors, advocacy strategies, debates and aspirations of those working in the 'NCD space'. Using the Forum as its object of research and analysis, this paper critically reflects on two persistent questions facing NCD advocates. First, how might NCDs be more like infectious diseases in cultivating a sense of urgency and action? Second, is NCD advocacy a 'movement' or a 'community' of loosely connected actors? Set against the emerging COVID-19 outbreak, which at the time of the Forum was limited to China and a handful of other countries, the Forum offered a unique opportunity to reflect upon the significant challenges facing NCD advocates across global north and south. COVID-19 only highlights how rising rates of NCDs have made global populations vulnerable to emerging infectious diseases. Yet, as the paper concludes, with the COVID-19 pandemic continuing to rage, the future of NCD advocacy and funding looks ever more fragile even as evidence of its need continues to grow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Until recently, the noncommunicable disease (NCD) category was composed of four chronic diseases (cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and chronic respiratory disease) and four shared, 'modifiable' behavioural risk factors (smoking, diet, physical activity and alcohol). In late 2018, the NCD category was expanded to include mental health as an additional disease outcome and air pollution as an explicit environmental risk factor. The newly‐expanded NCD category connects behavioural and environmental readings of risk and shifts attention from individual acts of consumption to unequal and inescapable conditions of environmental exposure. It thus renders the increasing 'toxicity' of everyday life amid ubiquitous environmental contamination a new conceptual and empirical concern for NCD research. It also, as this paper explores, signals a new 'optics' of a much‐maligned disease category. This is particularly significant as chronic disease research has long been siloed between public and environmental health, with each discipline operationalising the notion of the 'environment' as a source of disease causation in contrasting ways. Given this, this paper is positioned as a significant contribution to both research on NCDs and environmental risk, bringing these interdisciplinary domains into a new critical conversation around the concept of toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lencucha and Thow's paper offers an important addition and corrective to the burgeoning body of work in public health on the 'commercial determinants of health' in the context of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Rather than tracing the origins of incoherence across policy sectors to the nefarious actions of industry, they argue that we need to be better attuned to the neoliberal ideologies that underpin these policies. In this commentary I explore two aspects of their argument that I find to be problematic: First, the suggestion that neoliberalism itself has some kind of deterministic or explanatory capacity across vastly different social, spatial, economic and political contexts. Second, I explore their concept of 'product-based NCD risk,' a perspective that disembodies and detaches risk from the social and structural conditions of their making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise of global health as a field of study and site of intervention has animated significant critical social science engagements. Of these, medical anthropology has arguably emerged as the ascendant in the field with its growing corpus of writing and advocacy largely animated by the discipline's 'suffering slot'. This paper thus applies a geographical critique to anthropology's moral, humanitarian impulse to give voice to suffering by exploring the spatial consequences of this mode of scholarship. It argues that the suffering slot inevitably leads global health researchers to certain archetypal spaces and that, in turn, these places: (i) are overwhelmingly biomedical; (ii) come to function as 'truth spots' in the production and circulation of global health knowledge and (iii) perpetuate a global health riddled with 'ignorance spots'. Given this, the paper asks what happens if we look beyond suffering to consider the hidden geographies of global health that might then be revealed. It argues that in order to develop a richer topography of global health knowledge and critique, we must also consider those spaces where pleasure and suffering intersect in ways that challenge the humanitarian impulse and crisis-led readings of health. These other archetypal spaces of global health - gyms, bars, supermarkets and more - are not flippant distractions from the grave reality of human suffering, but rather spaces that condition the genesis of suffering and where affliction is put aside in favour of pleasure. In arguing that we need to be far more attuned to the non-medical spaces where global health is produced, experienced and challenged, the paper also articulates how geography might productively meet anthropology in critical studies of global health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses the idea of a 'charismatic gap' to help explain the disjuncture between the burden of disease attributable to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in the global south and a tendency to view this as something of 'an esoteric distraction from more pressing concerns in global health' such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, TB, vaccination and maternal health (Livingston, Improvising Medicine: An African Oncology Ward in an Emerging Cancer Epidemic. Durham: Duke University Press, 2012, p. 9). NCDs are a composite category of cardiovascular disease, respiratory diseases, cancer and diabetes grouped together by virtue of four shared risk factors (tobacco, alcohol, unhealthy diets and sedentarism). While infectious diseases spread through viruses or bacteria under conditions of contagion that can provoke fear, disgust, suspicion and irrationality amid physical suffering and high mortality rates, NCDs have too often been met with ennui. This paper draws on the concept of charisma to help explore and explain the 'neglected epidemic' of NCDs in the global south through four themes: The lexicon used to describe, frame and communicate NCDs; risk factors and culpability; the temporality of disease and its embodiment. In conclusion, the paper reflects on how to activate the latent charismatic potential of NCDs in the global south. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we explore the emergence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) as an object of political concern in and for countries of the global South. While epidemiologists and public health practitioners and scholars have long expressed concern with the changing global distribution of the burden of NCDs, it is only in more recent years that the aetiology, politics and consequences of these shifts have become an object of critical social scientific enquiry. These shifts mark the starting point for this special issue on 'The Politics of NCDs in the Global South' and act as the basis for new, critical interventions in how we understand NCDs. In this paper, we aim not only to introduce and contextualise the six contributions that form this special issue, but also to identify and explore three themes - problematisation, care and culture - that index the main areas of analytical and empirical concern that have motivated analyses of NCDs in the global South and are central to critical engagement with their political contours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary complements and extends Brown and Moon's (2012) work on 'geography and global health' by starting where their piece finished - the post-2015 development agenda. It explores three core elements of this agenda: the debate over the revised Millennium Development Goals, new Sustainable Development Goals and the inclusion of non-communicable disease within both. It then critically reflects on the significance of this for three areas of geographical engagements with global health in particular, and health in more general terms: the (re)integration of health and the urban; shifts in global funding priorities; and the genesis and effects of what have been termed 'industrial epidemics'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: While attention to the socio-ecological and political economic influences on health grows, there remains a paucity of political ecological analyses of health (King, 2010). At the same time, the growing burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the Global South demands new conceptual and pragmatic engagements with their modifiable risk factors. Drawing on the example of South Africa, this paper argues that alcohol consumption might usefully be theorised in political ecological lexicon as a “disaster”. To do so, it draws attention to the upstream causes of vulnerability, rather than just the downstream effects of risky drinking. This reorientation is needed for sustainable, publicly acceptable alcohol policies. To realise this, it draws on Blaikie et al.’s (1994, 2003) political ecological approach to risk, vulnerability and coping and, more specifically, applies their Pressure and Release model to explore liquor as a situated “disaster” in South Africa’s Western Cape province. In so doing, it aims to mark out an under-explored research agenda that considers alcohol as a pervasive governance dilemma. In addition, it also reflects on the model’s utility as a means of communicating findings that might reorient policy discussions on alcohol control in both South Africa and countries of the Global South. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• The burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) across the world is known, but concrete action is lacking. • Covid-19 has made the risks of and vulnerabilities from NCDs more visible. • The future of the global NCD agenda is uncertain, but needs to be included in pandemic preparedness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decolonisation agenda is gathering momentum in global health. Within this movement, one domain of analysis has been the ways in which the geographies of scholarly knowledge production (re)produce the inequities of coloniality. Drawing on the example of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), here we deviate from this and instead examine the authorship of the key global documents that were used to ignite and mobilise the NCD advocacy agenda from 2000 to 2020. In doing so, we reflect on the changing ecosystems of authorial expertise. It shows that while the geographic distribution of expertise has broadened over time, the NCD domain remains a fairly tight and circumscribed network. Importantly this research also shows the complexities of ascribing location to expertise, a finding that speaks back to the decolonisation debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]