Abstract
This chapter progresses across three associated fields of crisis. These fields are grounded in an issue which has been of interest in other parts of this book — the value of individual (bodily) integrity and human dignity. Differentially valuing life within the global community has not only skewed our appreciation of the nature and location of global crisis, but it has also discriminated the allocation of regulatory resources far from objective considerations of relative harm and most pressing need. Moving on from contention about individual integrity as (or not as the case may be) a sound measure of regulatory need, this chapter considers the relationship between health research and wealth gap. Is the response to health crisis mediated by commercial rather than humanitarian markets? The focus then moves on to considerations of regulating global health pandemics wherein recently has been evidenced a collaborative capacity beyond nation state or wealth interests. Is it in the challenge to global health that we see emerged the connection between communities of shared risk transforming them into communities of shared fate?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
See for example: Yamin, A. and Gloppen, S. (eds.) (2011) Litigating Health Rights: Can Courts Bring More Justice to Health? Cambridge: Harvard University Press. This text includes case studies from Costa Rica, South Africa, India, Brazil, Argentina and Colombia.
Foucault uses the term ‘securitise’ to refer to techniques that foster life and that work at the level of population, see, for example, Foucault, M. (2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège De France, 1977–1978 (trans. G. Burchell) Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
Foucault, M. (2003) ‘Society Must Be Defended’: Lectures at the Collège De France, 1975–1976 (trans. David Macey) London: Picador.
Cotterrell, R. (2008) ‘Community as a Legal Concept? Some Uses of a Law-and-Community Approach in Legal Theory’, in R. Cotterrell (ed.) Living Law: Studies in Legal and Social Theory. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 17–28; Queen Mary School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 95/2011.
For a more detailed consideration of this matter, see Clarke, K. and Ogus, A. (1978) ‘What is a Wife Worth?’, British Journal of Law and Society, 5/1: 1–25.
Viscusi, W. (2009) ‘The Devaluation of Life’, Regulation & Governance 3/2: 103–127.
Fourcade, M. (2009) ‘The Political Valuation of Life’, Regulation & Governance 3/3: 291–297.
Sunstein, C. (1986) ‘Legal Interference with Private Preferences’, University of Chicago Law Review 53/4: 1129–1174.
Bauman, Z. (2007) ‘Humanity on the Move’, Liquid Times: Living in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press. Chapter 2.
Clamon argues that conflicts of interests between the competing interests — such as those between commercial research interests and public university-based research — is a major factor compromising patient safety: Clamon, J. (2003) ‘The Search for a Cure: Combating the Problem of Conflicts of Interest That Currently Plagues Biomedical Research’, Iowa Law Review 89/1: 235–271.
Braithwaite, J. (1984) Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industty. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Resnik, D. (1999) ‘Privatized Biomedical Research, Public Fears, and the Hazards of Government Regulation: Lessons from Stem Cell Research’, Health Care Analysis 7/3: 273–287.
Braithwaite, J. (1993) ‘Transnational Regulation of the Pharmaceutical Industry’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 525/1: 12–30.
Schiffino, N. and Varone, F. (2006) ‘Regulating Biomedicine in Belgium and France: Neighboring Countries, Diverging Policies’, German Policy Studies 3/4: 648–697.
King, K. (1998) ‘A Proposal for the Effective International Regulation of Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects’, Stanford Journal of International Law 34: 163–206.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences & World Health Organisation (1993) International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects. Geneva: World Health Organisation, http://www.cioms.ch/publications/guidelines/guidelines_nov_2002_blurb.htm
It is interesting to see pandemic prevention securitised in order to increase risk and sharpen fate. Katz, R. and Fischer, J. (2010) ‘The Revised International Health Regulations: A Framework for Global Pandemic Response’, Global Health Governance 3/2: 1–18.
Black, J. (2008) ‘Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes’, Regulation & Governance 2/2: 137–164.
For instance, in 2004, the Cambodian government reversed its permission for a trial of HIV pre-exposure antiretroviral drug Tenofovir within Cambodia’s sex worker population after HIV and sex worker activists brought the disparities between participation and benefits for Cambodia to public attention: Singh, J. and Mills, E. (2005) ‘The Abandoned Trials of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for HIV: What Went Wrong?’, Public Library of Science Medicine 2/9: 824–827.
Black, J. (1998) ‘Regulation as Facilitation: Negotiating the Genetic Revolution’, The Modern Law Review 61/5: 621–660.
I am not suggesting that cooperation across boundaries is not limited or does not require improvement; see, for instance, the discussion in: Kumanan, W., Brownstein, J., and Fidler, D. (2010) ‘Strengthening the International Health Regulations: Lessons from the H1N1 Pandemic’, Health Policy Plan 25/6: 505–509.
Koivusalo, M. (2011) ‘Trade and Health: The Ethics of Global Rights, Regulation and Redistribution’, in S. Benatar and G. Brock (eds.) Global Health and Global Health Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 143–152, at p. 152.
See, for instance, Nelson, V. (1999) ‘The Reagan Administration’s Response to AIDS: Conservative Argument and Conflict’, in W. Elwood (ed.) Power in the Blood: A Handbook on AIDS, Politics and Communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 53–66.
Oscar Wilde, as quoted in Beaumont, M. (2004) ‘Reinterpreting Oscar Wilde’s Concept of Utopia: The Soul of Man under Socialism’, Utopian Studies 15/1: 13–29.
Brennan and Berwick argue that organisational capacity relies on innovation and the ability to learn from innovation, see Brennan, T. and Berwick, D. (1996) New Rules: Regulation, Markets and the Quality of American Health Care. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2013 Mark Findlay
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Findlay, M. (2013). Regulating Human Integrity — Who Owns Your Body?. In: Contemporary Challenges in Regulating Global Crises. International Political Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137009111_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137009111_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-43595-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-00911-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)