© Oxford University Press, 2004
Communicable disease control: a ‘Global Public Good’ perspective
1 Health Economics, Law and Ethics Group, School of Medicine, Health Policy & Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
2 Strategy Unit, Director General’s Office, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
3 Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK
4 Department of Health Service Provision, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
Correspondence: Richard Smith, Health Economics, Law and Ethics Group, School of Medicine, Health Policy & Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK. Tel: +44 (0)1603 593617, fax: +44 (0)1603 593604, email: Richard.Smith{at}uea.ac.uk
Despite the increasing ‘globalization’ of health, the responsibility for it remains primarily national, generating a potential mismatch between global health problems and current institutions and mechanisms to deal with them. The ‘Global Public Good’ (GPG) concept has been suggested as a framework to address this mismatch in different areas of public policy. This paper considers the application of the GPG concept as an organizing principle for communicable disease control (CDC), considering in particular its potential to improve the health and welfare of the developing world.
The paper concludes that there are significant limitations to the GPG concept’s effectiveness as an organizing principle for global health priorities, with respect to CDC. More specifically, there are few areas of CDC which qualify as GPG, and even among those that can be considered GPGs, it is not necessarily appropriate to provide everything which can be considered a GPG. It is therefore suggested that it may be more useful to focus instead on the failure of ‘collective action’, where the GPG concept may then: (1) provide a rationale to raise funds additional to aid from developed countries’ domestic budgets; (2) promote investment by developed countries in the health systems of developing countries; (3) promote strategic partnerships between developed and developing countries to tackle major global communicable diseases; and (4) guide the political process of establishing, and mechanisms for providing and financing, global CDC programmes with GPG characteristics, and GPGs which have benefits for CDC.
In short, the GPG concept is not without limitations and weaknesses as an organizing principle, but does provide, at least in some areas, guidance in improving collective action at the international level for the improvement of global CDC.
Key Words: public goods, globalization, communicable disease control
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. D Smith Trade and public health: facing the challenges of globalisation. J Epidemiol Community Health, August 1, 2006; 60(8): 650 - 651. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Laxminarayan, M. Over, and D. L. Smith Will a global subsidy of new antimalarials delay the emergence of resistance and save lives? Health Aff., March 1, 2006; 25(2): 325 - 336. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Wilson Infectious diseases in Iraq have international implications BMJ, November 27, 2004; 329(7477): 1289 - 1289. [Full Text]
|
|