RSS

Global health is moving up the security agenda as an emerging issue. However this acceptance largely focuses on threats to states through highly infectious diseases that have crossed borders quickly - as seen through outbreaks of SARs and Swine Flu, or the potential for disease to be used as a biological weapon, a reminder of which being the anthrax terrorist attack on the US in 2001. 

While the often understated link between health and security resurfaces time and again within the transatlantic community, the issue is clearly dictated by what is seen as an immediate threat to states rather than other aspects of individual health security. This is highlighted through the example of neglected diseases. Neglected diseases, as the name might indicate, are not focused upon.  This is because epidemics originating in developing countries is only a worry to developed countries if disease reaches their country, while neglected diseases remain mostly confined to the developing countries affected by them. Neglected diseases as a group of tropical infections are endemic in low-income populations in the developing regions of Africa, Asia and the Americas. Billions of people suffer from severe lack of protection and the negative impact on on the economy through loss of productivity, health costs and forgone educational opportunities cannot be underestimated. Therefore there is cause for neglected diseases to be called a transatlantic security issue within a responsible community that promotes development and an improved life chances for all. In a globalised world issues that affect the security of millions cannot be ignored.

Still, what can be done to bring acceptance to such an idea? New forms of social organisation can challenge the dominant state-centric thinking, meaning action against neglected diseases is taken outside of individual state prerogatives. A diverse collection of collaborative innovation activities have begun breaking down long-held boundaries between private companies, research institutes, not-for-profit organisations and government initiatives.  For example the Novartis Institute for Tropical Diseases (NITD) is a public-private partnership established by the Pharmaceutical company Novartis and working with Doctors without Borders.  NGOs that may have in the past treated pharmaceutical companies with suspicion are now willing to work side-by-side.

Most surprising is the support for such an approach from private companies, the so-called ‘Big Phama’ who have traditionally acted in a protective and closed way. Haruo Naito, president of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) is an example of a prominent figure in the industry showing backing: ´I trust that an open innovation approach, which is fully compatible with the current Intellectual Property Rights regime, will be adopted in this context and that many parties will join it`.  Similarly CEO Andrew Witty of UK pharmaceutical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline has announced the launch of an agenda on open innovation for collaborative working with various parties. The reason for such a receptive response is argued (by Fredberg, Elmquist and Ollila) to be because it has become too costly to keep all research and development competences in-house.  Although it is not clear if intentions of working together towards a shared goal of tackling neglected diseases will be on the same terms and that the rhetoric of private actors meet the needs of an urgent reality.

For the big US and European pharmaceutical companies neglected diseases were not seen as a profitable revenue stream for drug research in the past. Also governments (both developed and developing) and NGOs have overlooked these diseases, with research and treatment directed at the ´big three´: Malaria, HIV/AIDs and Tuberculosis, even though the effect of neglected diseases in some countries is as acute.  Through collaboration there are now signs that this situation is beginning to change. 

Institutional and public sector backing is also following suit. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has recently called for an increase in targeted research for neglected diseases and a long-term commitment of resources in launching their first report on ´Working to overcome the global impact of neglected tropical diseases´. Over a few years neglected diseases have gained an elevated status and are starting to be properly recognised as a global health priority for governments, international institutions and non-profit organisations across the globe.  US president Obama even included neglected diseases in his Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development.

Nevertheless, despite a growth in interest in such an important global health issue, the state remains the priority. Health on an individual basis needs to be seen as a transatlantic security issue, by treating it as that: an issue that is truly a transatlantic concern, requiring working not only between states but cutting across public and private lines that define our transatlantic community. This understanding should be taken forward in the conventional transatlantic venues including the UN and EU, to move beyond health as a security concern limited to diseases that directly impact developed countries. This would provide more impetus for action going forward, with security still prioritised above any development or equity goals.

Note: these views are my own and do not necessarily represent those of the UK Department for Business Innovation and Skills

Sam Vanderslott is a policy advisor at the UK Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS). She works on enterprise policy for start-up firms, exploring access to finance and innovation issues. Her research background is in economic development and global governance at the Universities of Bath and Oxford.