Abstract
Establishing indicators oriented towards the creation of a global society to the detriment of new forms of neo-colonialism. In the relations between Developed and Emerging Countries as part of the Global Health Diplomacy, there is a risk that the former can adopt behaviors induced by the financial needs of overcoming their crisis. The most relevant Documents by International Organizations and Articles published in the past regarding actions in this area and the forecast of economic growth in various areas of the World are considered and the hypothesis of dual scenarios that may arise from these are postulated. There are two hypothetical scenarios arising from the “six leadership priorities”: the search for a Global Society or initiating forms of neocolonialism on the part of developed countries towards emerging ones. If the “economic lens” is to prevail then the developed Countries, would seek to charge their crisis to emerging Ones where a forthcoming significant growth has expected; if the “ethical lens” is to prevail, it will be most likely be the hypothesis of a Global Society where there is a respect of Human Rights in order to drive growth and harmonization of relations between Governments.
Article PDF
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Health in all policies 2006 European Observatory on Health Systems and Policy.
Oslo Ministerial Declaration—global health: a pressing foreign policy issue of our time. Lancet 2007;369;1373–8.
General Assembly UN: Global Health and foreign policy: strategic opportunities an challenges. Note by Secretary-General, 2009. A/64/305.
Kaplan JP, Bond TC, Merson MH, et al. Towards a common definition of global health. Lancet 2009;373;1993–1995.
Labontè R, Gagnon ML. Framing health and foreign policy: lesson for global health diplomacy. Global Health 2010;6;14.
Merson MH. University engagement in Global Health. N Engl J Med. 2014;370;1676–8.
Kichbusch I, Novotny TE, Drager N, Silberschmidt G, Alcazar S. Global Health diplomacy: training across disciplines. Bull World Health Organ 2007;85;971–3.
Fidler D P. Assessing the foreign policy and global health initiative: the meaning of the Oslo process. Chatham House breafing paper 2011. www.chathamhouse.org.ukl (Accessed 25.02.2017).
Twelfth General Programme of Work, 2014–2019 Not merely absence of Disease WHO 2014.
Global Health and foreign policy. Note by the Secretary-General. UN. General Assembly Sixsty-ninth session, 2014.
IMS Institute. Global Outlook for Medicines through 2018, November 2014.
FAO Hunger Map (http://www.fao.org/hunger/en/) (Accessed 25.02.2017).
World Economic Outlook, IMF, October 2014.
ECB (https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/tasks/international/emerg-ing/html/index.en.html) (Accessed 12.02.2017).
Jamison DT, Summers LH, Alleyne G, et al. Global health 2035: a world converging within a generation. Lancet 2013;382;1898–1955.
Frenk J, Gomez-Dantes O, Moon S. From sovereign to solidarity: a renewed concept of global health for an era of complex interdependence. Lancet 2014;383;94–7.
Kickbusch I, Kokény M. Global health diplomacy: five years on. Bull World Health Organ 2013;91;159A.
Cotesta V. Global Society and Human Rigths, 2012. Editor: Matthew D′Auria Book.
Hunter DFJ, e Fineberg H V. Convergence to Common Purpose in Global Health NEJM 2014;370;1753–55.
Merson MH. University engagement in Global health NEJM 2014;370;1676–8.
Crisp N, Chen L. Global Supply for Health Professionals. NEJM 2014.
Kevany S. Global health diplomacy, ‘smart power’, and the new world order. Glob Public Health 2014;9;787–807.
Kevany S. New roles for global health: diplomatic, security, and foreign policy responsiveness. Lancet Glob Health 2016;4;e83–e4.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc/4.0/).
About this article
Cite this article
Rubbini, M. Global Health Diplomacy: Between Global Society and Neo-colonialism: The Role and Meaning of “Ethical Lens” in Performing the Six Leadership Priorities. J Epidemiol Glob Health 8, 110–114 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/j.jegh.2017.11.002
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/j.jegh.2017.11.002