Assessing proposals for new global health treaties: An analytic framework

S.J. Hoffman, J.-A. Røttingen and J. Frenk

American Journal of Public Health, 2015, vol. 105, issue 8, 1523-1530

Abstract: We have presented an analytic framework and 4 criteria for assessing when global health treaties have reasonable prospects of yielding net positive effects. First, there must be a significant transnational dimension to the problem being addressed. Second, the goals should justify the coercive nature of treaties. Third, proposed global health treaties should have a reasonable chance of achieving benefits. Fourth, treaties should be the best commitment mechanism among the many competing alternatives. Applying this analytic framework to 9 recent calls for new global health treaties revealed that none fully meet the 4 criteria. Efforts aiming to better use or revise existing international instruments may be more productive than is advocating new treaties. © 2015, American Public Health Association Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: economics; health; health care cost; human; international cooperation; legislation and jurisprudence; program evaluation, Global Health; Health Care Costs; Humans; International Cooperation; Program Evaluation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302726

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2015.302726_6

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302726

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().