Of Politicians and Technocrats, and Why Global Health Scholars Are Inevitably a Bit of Both: A Response to Recent Commentaries

Document Type: Correspondence

Author

Institute of Public Health, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany

Keywords

Main Subjects


When I wrote “Navigating Between Stealth Advocacy and Unconscious Dogmatism: The Challenge of Researching the Norms, Politics and Power of Global Health,” 1 my primary intention was to fuel the interdisciplinary dialogue on norms, politics, and power that had been started in this journal by others. Considering the five insightful comments, 2-6 responding to my article, I think I can claim at least that: the dialogue continues, as it should... (Read more...)

  1. Ooms G. Navigating between stealth advocacy and unconscious dogmatism: the challenge of researching the norms, politics and power of global health. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015;4(10):641-644. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.116
  2. Askheim C, Heggen K, Engebretsen E. Politics and power in global health: the constituting role of conflicts: Comment on “Navigating between stealth advocacy and unconscious dogmatism: the challenge of researching the norms, politics and power of global health.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(2):117-119. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.188
  3. Forman L. The ghost is the machine: how can we visibilize the unseen norms and power of global health? Comment on “Navigating between stealth advocacy and unconscious dogmatism: the challenge of researching the norms, politics and power of global health.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(3):197-199. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.206
  4. Kickbusch I. Politics or technocracy – what next for global health? Comment on “Navigating between stealth advocacy and unconscious dogmatism: the challenge of researching the norms, politics and power of global health.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(3):201-204. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.209
  5. Marten R. Global health warning: definitions wield power: Comment on “Navigating between stealth advocacy and unconscious dogmatism: the challenge of researching the norms, politics and power of global health.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(3):207–209. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.213
  6. Hanefeld J. Advancing global health – the need for (better) social science: Comment on: “Navigating between stealth advocacy and unconscious dogmatism: the challenge of researching the norms, politics and power of global health.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(4):279-281. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.213
  7. Timmins N. At last, NICE to take over the Cancer Drugs Fund. BMJ. 2016;352:i1324. doi:10.1136/bmj.i1324
  8. Røttingen JA, Ottersen T, Ablo A, et al. Shared Responsibilities for Health: A Coherent Global Framework for Health Financing. Final Report of the Centre on Global Health Security Working Group on Health Financing. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/field/field_document/20140521HealthFinancing.pdf
  9. Koplan JP, Bond TC, Merson MH, et al. Towards a common definition of global health. Lancet. 2009;373(9679):1993–1995. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60332-9
  10. Beaglehole R, Bonita R. What is Global Health? Global Health Action. 2010;3:5142.
  11. Ooms G, Rachel H, Decoster K, Van Damme W. Global health: what it has been so far, what it should be, and what it could become. Working paper/syllabus. http://www.itg.be/itg/Uploads/Volksgezondheid/wpshsop/SHSOP%20WP%202%20Ooms%20Global%20Health.pdf