From conceptual pluralism to practical agreement on policy: global responsibility for global health

Conclusions:
The 2014 Lancet Commission on Global Governance for Health Report asks whether a single global health protection fund would be better for global health than the current patchwork of global and national social transfers. We concur with this suggestion and argue that there is much room for practical agreement on a Global Fund for Health that moves from the conceptual level into policies and practice that advance global health. The issues of shared responsibility and mutual accountability feature widely in the post-2015 discussions and need to be addressed in a coherent manner. Our article argues why and how a Global Fund for Health effectuates this, thus advancing global responsibility for global health.

Source: BMC International Health and Human Rights - October 28, 2015 Category: Global & Universal Authors: Jennifer RugerRachel HammondsGorik OomsDonna BarryAudrey ChapmanWim Van Damme Source Type: research