1
|
Townsend B, Tenni BF, Goldman S, Gleeson D. Public health advocacy strategies to influence policy agendas: lessons from a narrative review of success in trade policy. Global Health 2023; 19:60. [PMID: 37612767 PMCID: PMC10463651 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-023-00960-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/26/2023] [Indexed: 08/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite accumulating evidence of the implications of trade policy for public health, trade and health sectors continue to operate largely in silos. Numerous barriers to advancing health have been identified, including the dominance of a neoliberal paradigm, powerful private sector interests, and constraints associated with policymaking processes. Scholars and policy actors have recommended improved governance practices for trade policy, including: greater transparency and accountability; intersectoral collaboration; the use of health impact assessments; South-South networking; and mechanisms for civil society participation. These policy prescriptions have been generated from specific cases, such as the World Trade Organization's Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health or specific instances of trade-related policymaking at the national level. There has not yet been a comprehensive analysis of what enables the elevation of health goals on trade policy agendas. This narrative review seeks to address this gap by collating and analysing known studies across different levels of policymaking and different health issues. RESULTS Sixty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Health issues that received attention on trade policy agendas included: access to medicines, food nutrition and food security, tobacco control, non-communicable diseases, access to knowledge, and asbestos harm. This has occurred in instances of domestic and regional policymaking, and in bilateral, regional and global trade negotiations, as well as in trade disputes and challenges. We identified four enabling conditions for elevation of health in trade-related policymaking: favourable media attention; leadership by trade and health ministers; public support; and political party support. We identified six strategies successfully used by advocates to influence these conditions: using and translating multiple forms of evidence, acting in coalitions, strategic framing, leveraging exogenous factors, legal strategy, and shifting forums. CONCLUSION The analysis demonstrates that while technical evidence is important, political strategy is necessary for elevating health on trade agendas. The analysis provides lessons that can be explored in the wider commercial determinants of health where economic and health interests often collide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Belinda Townsend
- Australian Research Centre for Health Equity, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
| | - Brigitte Frances Tenni
- School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia
- Nossal Institute for Global Health, The School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, 3010, Australia
| | - Sharni Goldman
- Australian Research Centre for Health Equity, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | - Deborah Gleeson
- School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Babyar J. Trade, intellectual property, and the public health bearing. Health Syst (Basingstoke) 2023; 12:123-132. [PMID: 36926369 PMCID: PMC10013560 DOI: 10.1080/20476965.2022.2062460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The objective of this article is to describe the current fracture between global trade and public health priorities, as well as examine opportunities for harmonisation. A literature review of public health, global trade, and intellectual property articles describes several issues with recommendations. Currently, there is mixed quality of research and a lack of health impact assessments to accompany the global trade agenda. Human rights concepts continue in debate as flexibilities to trade laws remain without organised surveillance or evaluation. There are specific, relevant recommendations to implement a trade agenda inclusive of public health leadership. Recent trade and intellctual property advances in public health collaborations should be supported and continued. Trade groups should produce impact assessments before decisions on policies are made, with quality to the research. Lastly, a global research and development treaty should be an open, accessed path.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julie Babyar
- RN, MPH, 136 Reliant Way American Canyon. CA 94503
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Milsom P, Smith R, Baker P, Walls H. International investment liberalization, transnational corporations and NCD prevention policy non-decisions: a realist review on the political economy of tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food. Global Health 2021; 17:134. [PMID: 34819083 PMCID: PMC8611909 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-021-00784-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Public health concerns relating to international investment liberalization have centred on the potential for investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS)-related regulatory chill. However, the broader political and economic dimensions that shape the relationship between the international investment regime and non-communicable disease (NCD) policy development have been less well explored. This review aimed to synthesise the available evidence using a political economy approach, to understand why, how and under what conditions transnational corporations may use the international investment regime to promote NCD prevention policy non-decisions. MAIN BODY Methods: Mechanisms explaining why/how the international investment regime may be used by transnational health-harmful commodity corporations (THCCs) to encourage NCD prevention policy non-decisions, including regulatory chill, were iteratively developed. Six databases and relevant grey literature was searched, and evidence was extracted, synthesized and mapped against the various proposed explanatory mechanisms. FINDINGS Eighty-nine sources were included. THCCs may be incentivised to use the ISDS mechanism since the costs may be outweighed by the benefits of even just delaying regulatory adoption, particularly since the chilling effect tends to ripple out across jurisdictions. Drivers of regulatory chill may include ambiguity in treaty terms, inconsistency in arbitral rulings, potential arbitrator bias and the high cost of arbitration. Evidence indicates ISDS can delay policy adoption both within the country directly involved but also in other jurisdictions. Additionally, governments are adopting standard assessments of public health regulatory proposals for trade and ISDS risk. Various economic, political and industry-related factors likely interact to increase (or decrease) the ultimate risk of regulatory chill. Some evidence indicates that THCCs take advantage of governments' prioritization of foreign investment over NCD prevention objectives to influence the NCD prevention regulatory environment. CONCLUSIONS While ISDS-related regulatory chill is a real risk under certain conditions, international investment-related NCD prevention policy non-decisions driven by broader political economy dynamics may well be more widespread and impactful on NCD regulatory environments. There is therefore a clear need to expand the research agenda on investment liberalization and NCD policy beyond regulatory chill and engage with theories and approaches from international relations and political science, including political economy and power analyses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penelope Milsom
- Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, WC1H 9SH UK
| | - Richard Smith
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Phillip Baker
- Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC Australia
| | - Helen Walls
- Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, WC1H 9SH UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Milsom P, Smith R, Baker P, Walls H. Corporate power and the international trade regime preventing progressive policy action on non-communicable diseases: a realist review. Health Policy Plan 2021; 36:493-508. [PMID: 33276385 PMCID: PMC8128013 DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czaa148] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Transnational tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food corporations use the international trade regime to prevent policy action on non-communicable diseases (NCDs); i.e. to promote policy 'non-decisions'. Understanding policy non-decisions can be assisted by identifying power operating in relevant decision-making spaces, but trade and health research rarely explicitly engages with theories of power. This realist review aimed to synthesize evidence of different forms and mechanisms of power active in trade and health decision-making spaces to understand better why NCD policy non-decisions persist and the implications for future transformative action. We iteratively developed power-based theories explaining how transnational health-harmful commodity corporations (THCCs) utilize the international trade regime to encourage NCD policy non-decisions. To support theory development, we also developed a conceptual framework for analysing power in public health policymaking. We searched six databases and relevant grey literature and extracted, synthesized and mapped the evidence against the proposed theories. One hundred and four studies were included. Findings were presented for three key forms of power. Evidence indicates THCCs attempt to exercise instrumental power by extensive lobbying often via privileged access to trade and health decision-making spaces. When their legitimacy declines, THCCs have attempted to shift decision-making to more favourable international trade legal venues. THCCs benefit from structural power through the institutionalization of their involvement in health and trade agenda-setting processes. In terms of discursive power, THCCs effectively frame trade and health issues in ways that echo and amplify dominant neoliberal ideas. These processes may further entrench the individualization of NCDs, restrict conceivable policy solutions and perpetuate policymaking norms that privilege economic/trade interests over health. This review identifies different forms and mechanisms of power active in trade and health policy spaces that enable THCCs to prevent progressive action on NCDs. It also points to potential strategies for challenging these power dynamics and relations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penelope Milsom
- Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London WC1H 9SH, UK
| | - Richard Smith
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Magdalen Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Phillip Baker
- Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Melbourne, Victoria 3125 Australia
| | - Helen Walls
- Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London WC1H 9SH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Townsend B, Friel S, Freeman T, Schram A, Strazdins L, Labonte R, Mackean T, Baum F. Advancing a health equity agenda across multiple policy domains: a qualitative policy analysis of social, trade and welfare policy. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e040180. [PMID: 33158831 PMCID: PMC7651713 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE While there is urgent need for policymaking that prioritises health equity, successful strategies for advancing such an agenda across multiple policy sectors are not well known. This study aims to address this gap by identifying successful strategies to advance a health equity agenda across multiple policy domains. DESIGN We conducted in-depth qualitative case studies in three important social determinants of health equity in Australia: employment and social policy (Paid Parental Leave); macroeconomics and trade policy (the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement); and welfare reform (the Northern Territory Emergency Response). The analysis triangulated multiple data sources included 71 semistructured interviews, document analysis and drew on political science theories related to interests, ideas and institutions. RESULTS Within and across case studies we observed three key strategies used by policy actors to advance a health equity agenda, with differing levels of success. The first was the use of multiple policy frames to appeal to a wide range of actors beyond health. The second was the formation of broad coalitions beyond the health sector, in particular networking with non-traditional policy allies. The third was the use of strategic forum shopping by policy actors to move the debate into more popular policy forums that were not health focused. CONCLUSIONS This analysis provides nuanced strategies for agenda-setting for health equity and points to the need for multiple persuasive issue frames, coalitions with unusual bedfellows, and shopping around for supportive institutions outside the traditional health domain. Use of these nuanced strategies could generate greater ideational, actor and institutional support for prioritising health equity and thus could lead to improved health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Belinda Townsend
- Menzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Sharon Friel
- Menzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Toby Freeman
- Southgate Institute of Health, Society and Equity, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Ashley Schram
- Menzies Centre for Health Governance, School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Lyndall Strazdins
- National Centre for Epidemiology and Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Ronald Labonte
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Tamara Mackean
- Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Fran Baum
- Southgate Institute of Health, Society and Equity, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Parziale A, Ooms G. The global fight against trans-fat: the potential role of international trade and law. Global Health 2019; 15:46. [PMID: 31296242 PMCID: PMC6625029 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-019-0488-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2018] [Accepted: 06/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Non-communicable diseases in general and cardiovascular diseases in particular are a leading cause of death globally. Trans-fat consumption is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. The World Health Organization's 'REPLACE' action package of 2018 aims to eliminate it completely in the global food supply by 2023. Legislative and other regulatory actions (i.e., banning trans-fat) are considered as effective means to achieve such a goal. Both wealthier and poorer countries are taking or considering action, as shown by the United States food regulations and Cambodian draft food legislation discussed in this paper. This paper reviews these actions and examines public and private stakeholders' incentives to increase health-protecting or health-promoting standards and regulations at home and abroad, setting the ground for further research on the topic. It focuses on the potential of trade incentives as a potential driver of a 'race to the top'. While it has been documented that powerful countries use international trade instruments to weaken other countries' national regulations, at times these powerful countries may also be interested in more stringent regulations abroad to protect their exports from competition from third countries with less stringent regulations. This article explores practical and principled considerations on how such a dynamic may spread trans-fat restrictions globally. It argues that trade dynamics and public health considerations within powerful countries may help to promote anti-trans-fat regulation globally but will not be sufficient and is ethically questionable. True international regulatory cooperation is needed and could be facilitated by the World Health Organization. Nevertheless, the paper highlights that international trade and investment law offers opportunities for anti-trans-fat policy diffusion globally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gorik Ooms
- Global Health & Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (UK), Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Labonté R, Crosbie E, Gleeson D, McNamara C. USMCA (NAFTA 2.0): tightening the constraints on the right to regulate for public health. Global Health 2019; 15:35. [PMID: 31088499 PMCID: PMC6518719 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-019-0476-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2019] [Accepted: 05/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In late 2018 the United States, Canada, and Mexico signed a new trade agreement (most commonly referred to by its US-centric acronym, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA) to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The new agreement is the first major trade treaty negotiated under the shadow of the Trump Administration’s unilateral imposition of tariffs to pressure other countries to accept provisions more favourable to protectionist US economic interests. Although not yet ratified, the agreement is widely seen as indicative of how the US will engage in future international trade negotiations. Methods Drawing from methods used in earlier health impact assessments of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, we undertook a detailed analysis of USMCA chapters that have direct or indirect implications for health. We began with an initial reading of the entire agreement, followed by multiple line-by-line readings of key chapters. Secondary sources and inter-rater (comparative) analyses by the four authors were used to ensure rigour in our assessments. Results The USMCA expands intellectual property rights and regulatory constraints that will lead to increased drug costs, particularly in Canada and Mexico. It opens up markets in both Canada and Mexico for US food exports without reducing the subsidies the US provides to its own producers, and introduces a number of new regulatory reforms that weaken public health oversight of food safety. It reduces regulatory policy space through new provisions on ‘technical barriers to trade’ and requirements for greater regulatory coherence and harmonization across the three countries. It puts some limitations on contentious investor-state dispute provisions between the US and Mexico, provisions often used to challenge or chill health and environmental measures, and eliminates them completely in disputes between the US and Canada; but it allows for new ‘legacy claims’ for 3 years after the agreement enters into force. Its labour and environmental chapters contain a few improvements but overall do little to ensure either workers’ rights or environmental protection. Conclusion Rather than enhancing public health protection the USMCA places new, extended, and enforceable obligations on public regulators that increase the power (voice) of corporate (investor) interests during the development of new regulations. It is not a health-enhancing template for future trade agreements that governments should emulate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ronald Labonté
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, 600 Peter Morand Crescent, Ottawa, Ontario, K1G 5Z3, Canada.
| | - Eric Crosbie
- School of Community Health Sciences, Ozmen Institute for Global Studies, University of Nevada Reno, 1664 N. Virginia Street, Reno, NV, 89557-0274, USA
| | - Deborah Gleeson
- School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia
| | - Courtney McNamara
- Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Labonté R. Trade, investment and public health: compiling the evidence, assembling the arguments. Global Health 2019; 15:1. [PMID: 30606214 PMCID: PMC6318870 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-018-0425-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2018] [Accepted: 10/19/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Trade has long been an axiomatic characteristic of globalization, although international rules governing trade are of more recent vintage. Notably in the post-World War II period, an ever increasing number of countries began negotiating treaties to reduce, first, tariff barriers and, later, non-tariff barriers (government measures of any sort) that could impede the cross-border flow of goods. The rationale, in part, was that countries that became more entwined economically would be less likely to go to war with each other. It wouldn't be in their own economic interests to do so, or at least that of the firms based within their borders but engaged in transnational trade and dependent upon global supply chains. At first primarily an undertaking of developed (high-income) countries, developing (low and middle-income countries) slowly enjoined in what, in 1995, became the World Trade Organization. The WTO locked in scheduled declines in tariffs (border taxes), albeit with lesser obligations on developing country members (a problematic nomenclature given the vast geographic, economic, and development differences between such countries, but which nonetheless persists within the WTO). Importantly, a slew of new agreements that coincided with the establishment of the WTO also sought to liberalize trade in services (not just goods) (The General Agreement on Trade in Services), create new rules for agricultural trade (Agreement on Agriculture), expand intellectual property rights protections (The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), limit trade-distorting government subsidies (Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures), and ensure that government food, health, or environmental regulations would not pose an unnecessary barrier to trade (the Technical Barriers to Trade and the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreements). Outside of the WTO system, bilateral or regional investment treaties granting special rights to foreign investors to sue governments for actions perceived to affect the value of their investment (such as direct expropriation or passage of new laws and regulations considered 'tantamount to expropriation') similarly exploded in number, dispute frequency, and the size of monetary claims. The breadth and depth of these post-1995 Agreements meant that few areas of general public health concern are potentially untouched.
Collapse
|
9
|
Government roles in regulating medical tourism: evidence from Guatemala. Int J Equity Health 2018; 17:150. [PMID: 30236120 PMCID: PMC6148768 DOI: 10.1186/s12939-018-0866-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2018] [Accepted: 09/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Regulation of the medical tourism and public health sectors overlap in many instances, raising questions of how patient safety, economic growth, and health equity can be protected. The case of Guatemala is used to explore how the regulatory challenges posed by medical tourism should be dealt with in countries seeking to grow this sector. Methods We conducted a qualitative case study of the medical tourism sector in Guatemala, through reviews and analyses of policy documents and media reports, key informant interviews (n = 50), and facility site-visits. Results Key informants were critical of the absence of effective public regulation of the emerging medical tourism sector, noting several regulatory gaps and the importance of filling them. These informants specifically expressed that: 1) The government should regulate medical tourism in Guatemala, thought there was disagreement as to which government sector should do so and how; 2) The government has not at this time regulated the medical tourism sector nor shown great interest in doing so; and 3) International accreditation could be used to augment domestic regulation. Conclusions The intersection of domestic and international regulation of medical tourism has been largely unexplored. This case study advances new research in this area. It highlights the need for and dearth of regulatory protections in Guatemala and lessons for other, similarly situated countries. National regulatory models from Israel and Barbados could be adapted to the Guatemalan context. Global governance could help to protect national governments from any competitive disadvantages created by regulation. Underlying the concerns over growth in medical tourism, however, is how it contributes to the ongoing privatization of health care facilities worldwide. This trend risks undermining efforts to reach targets for Universal Health Coverage and exacerbating existing inequities in the global distribution of health and wealth.
Collapse
|
10
|
Townsend B, Gleeson D, Lopert R. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, Intellectual Property Protection, and Access to Medicines. Asia Pac J Public Health 2017; 28:682-693. [PMID: 27920239 DOI: 10.1177/1010539516676338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
The inclusion of elevated standards of intellectual property (IP) protection in the recently negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement has raised serious public health concerns regarding access to medicines. A lesser-known trade agreement under negotiation in the Asia-Pacific region is the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Framed as an attempt to reassert ASEAN's position in response to the United States-led TPP, RCEP includes key players China and India as well as several low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Leaked drafts of IP provisions proposed by Japan and South Korea raise similar concerns in the Asia-Pacific region. This article identifies TRIPS (Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights agreement)-Plus provisions in leaked negotiating texts and examines their implications for LMICs that are not also parties to the TPP: Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, China, and India. We find that higher levels of IP protection delay the market entry of generic medicines, giving rise to increased costs to governments and reduced access to essential medicines. The article concludes that the public health community should recognize risks inherent in trade agreements that promote expansions of IP rights and engage with governments to ensure that public health is adequately and explicitly protected in trade and investment negotiations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ruth Lopert
- George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Labonté R, Schram A, Ruckert A. The TPP Is Dead, Long Live the TPP? A Response to Recent Commentaries. Int J Health Policy Manag 2017; 6:245-247. [PMID: 28812810 PMCID: PMC5384989 DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2017.12] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2017] [Accepted: 01/22/2017] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ronald Labonté
- Canada Research Chair, Globalization and Health Equity, Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Ashley Schram
- School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | - Arne Ruckert
- Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|