How states engage in and exercise power in global health

Indonesian and Japanese engagement in the conceptualization of Sustainable Development Goal 3

Bibliographic Data

ID5079799
AuthorsRainer Martens (0000-0002-2416-2309), Johanna Hanefeld (0000-0001-9487-2333), R Smith (0000-0003-3837-6559), Richard D Smith (0000-0002-4553-5426)
Year2023
Volume321
Pages115455
Publication date2023-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Science & Medicine (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0277-9536 • E-ISSN: 1873-5347
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115455
PMID36854234
OpenAlexW4305057263
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited20

While long overlooked, power is central to understand how actors engage in global health policymaking. We reviewed how the Japanese and Indonesian governments exerted power and engaged in global health diplomacy during negotiations to conceptualize the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goal for health (SDG3). We conducted deliberative policy analysis including semi-structured, in-depth, interviews with more than 71 policymakers, which we analyzed adapting Barnett and Duvall's power framework. We find that both Japan and Indonesia exerted non-material power (institutional, productive and structural power) to advance largely domestic political interests. Japan's government mainly exerted institutional power, leveraging relationships within the World Bank and the World Health Organization, whereas Indonesia's government focused on structural power, with its president serving as co-chair of the UN Secretary-General's High-Level Post-2015 Panel. Our analysis suggests that the ways in which states engage in global health diplomacy is shaped by the relationship between different intra-state institutions, particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Health, and is further determined by broader foreign policy and diplomatic priorities. We find that the decline of states' influence is over-stated: states continue to exercise significant power in global health diplomacy, pursuing domestic political imperatives and strategies to improve population health. As states expand their global health engagement, researchers should seek to better understand how states participate in an increasingly crowded and contested global health field

Conceptualization · Diplomacy · Economic growth · Economics · Foreign policy · Global health · Government (linguistics · Health care · International relations · Ministry of Foreign Affairs · Negotiation · Political science · Politics · Population · Power (physics · Sociology · Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology · Global Security and Public Health · Policy Transfer and Learning · Health Policy · Law · Public Administration