IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v15y2024i4p689-707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urgent pandemic messaging of WHO, World Bank, and G20 is inconsistent with their evidence base

Author

Listed:
  • David Bell
  • Garrett Wallace Brown
  • Jean von Agris
  • Blagovesta Tacheva

Abstract

When international agencies make claims of an “existential threat” to humanity and advocate for urgent action from countries, it should be a safe assumption that they are consistent with their own data. However, a review of the data and evidentiary citations underlying the claims of the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, and the Group of Twenty (G20) reveals a troubling picture in which the stated urgency and burden of infectious disease outbreaks, namely those of pandemic threat, is grossly misrepresented. These discrepancies in key documents and subsequent recitations in pandemic preparedness proposals have significant policy and financial implications. Disproportionate pandemic preparedness based on these false premises risks a significant opportunity cost through unnecessary diversion of financial and political resources away from global health priorities of higher burden. As WHO Member States plan to transform the way international health emergencies are managed at the World Health Assembly in May 2024, there is a crucial need to pause, rethink, and ensure future policy reflects evidence of need.

Suggested Citation

  • David Bell & Garrett Wallace Brown & Jean von Agris & Blagovesta Tacheva, 2024. "Urgent pandemic messaging of WHO, World Bank, and G20 is inconsistent with their evidence base," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(4), pages 689-707, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:15:y:2024:i:4:p:689-707
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.13390
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13390
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.13390?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:15:y:2024:i:4:p:689-707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.