IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v131y2015icp263-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Medical countermeasures for national security: A new government role in the pharmaceuticalization of society

Author

Listed:
  • Elbe, Stefan
  • Roemer-Mahler, Anne
  • Long, Christopher

Abstract

How do governments contribute to the pharmaceuticalization of society? Whilst the pivotal role of industry is extensively documented, this article shows that governments too are accelerating, intensifying and opening up new trajectories of pharmaceuticalization in society. Governments are becoming more deeply invested in pharmaceuticals because their national security strategies now aspire to defend populations against health-based threats like bioterrorism and pandemics. To counter those threats, governments are acquiring and stockpiling a panoply of ‘medical countermeasures’ such as antivirals, next-generation vaccines, antibiotics and anti-toxins. More than that, governments are actively incentivizing the development of many new medical countermeasures – principally by marshaling the state's unique powers to introduce exceptional measures in the name of protecting national security. At least five extraordinary policy interventions have been introduced by governments with the aim of stimulating the commercial development of novel medical countermeasures: (1) allocating earmarked public funds, (2) granting comprehensive legal protections to pharmaceutical companies against injury compensation claims, (3) introducing bespoke pathways for regulatory approval, (4) instantiating extraordinary emergency use procedures allowing for the use of unapproved medicines, and (5) designing innovative logistical distribution systems for mass drug administration outside of clinical settings. Those combined efforts, the article argues, are spawning a new, government-led and quite exceptional medical countermeasure regime operating beyond the conventional boundaries of pharmaceutical development and regulation. In the first comprehensive analysis of the pharmaceuticalization dynamics at play in national security policy, this article unearths the detailed array of policy interventions through which governments too are becoming more deeply imbricated in the pharmaceuticalization of society.

Suggested Citation

  • Elbe, Stefan & Roemer-Mahler, Anne & Long, Christopher, 2015. "Medical countermeasures for national security: A new government role in the pharmaceuticalization of society," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 263-271.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:131:y:2015:i:c:p:263-271
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.04.035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614002664
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.04.035?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Tim & Bell, Morag, 2008. "Imperial or postcolonial governance? Dissecting the genealogy of a global public health strategy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(10), pages 1571-1579, November.
    2. Ernst R. Berndt & Rachel Glennerster & Michael R. Kremer & Jean Lee & Ruth Levine & Georg Weizsäcker & Heidi Williams, 2007. "Advance market commitments for vaccines against neglected diseases: estimating costs and effectiveness," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 491-511, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Manca, Terra, 2018. "“One of the greatest medical success stories:” Physicians and nurses’ small stories about vaccine knowledge and anxieties," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 182-189.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marco Sahm, 2020. "Advance-Purchase Financing of Projects with Few Buyers," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 57(4), pages 909-933, December.
    2. Kremer, Michael & Williams, Heidi & Snyder, Christopher & Goodkin-Gold, Matthew, 2020. "Optimal Subsidies for Prevention of Infectious Disease," CEPR Discussion Papers 15433, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Michael Kremer & Jonathan Levin & Christopher M. Snyder, 2022. "Designing Advance Market Commitments for New Vaccines," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4786-4814, July.
    4. Patricia J Lopez, 2015. "Clumsy beginnings: from ‘modernizing mission’ to humanitarianism in the US occupation of Haiti (1915–34)," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(11), pages 2240-2256, November.
    5. Joshua S. Gans & David B. Ridley, 2013. "Innovation Incentives under Transferable Fast-Track Regulatory Review," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 789-816, September.
    6. Michael Drummond & Adrian Towse, 2014. "Orphan drugs policies: a suitable case for treatment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(4), pages 335-340, May.
    7. P.K. Joshi & Avinash Kishore & Devesh Roy, 2016. "Making Pulses Affordable Again: Policy Options from the Farm to Retail in India," Working Papers id:11327, eSocialSciences.
    8. Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2013. "Neglected infectious diseases: Are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting drug development research?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 185-208, April.
    9. Paola Martin & Diwakar Gupta & Karthik V. Natarajan, 2020. "Vaccine Procurement Contracts for Developing Countries," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(11), pages 2601-2620, November.
    10. Hartz, Susanne & John, Jürgen, 2009. "Public health policy decisions on medical innovations: What role can early economic evaluation play?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 184-192, February.
    11. George Mavrotas (ed.), 2011. "Security and Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14631.
    12. Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2011. "Neglected infectious diseases: are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting research?," MPRA Paper 40193, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Mattoo, Aaditya & Subramanian, Arvind, 2013. "A"greenprint"for international cooperation on climate change," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6440, The World Bank.
    14. Marco Sahm, 2015. "Advance-Purchase Financing of Projects with Few Buyers," CESifo Working Paper Series 5560, CESifo.
    15. Carter, Eric D., 2015. "Making the Blue Zones: Neoliberalism and nudges in public health promotion," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 374-382.
    16. Brown, Tim, 2011. "'Vulnerability is universal': Considering the place of 'security' and 'vulnerability' within contemporary global health discourse," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 319-326, February.
    17. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09iatrhegan is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Chiappinelli, Olga & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2023. "Public procurement as an innovation policy: Where do we stand?," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-002, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Emeric Henry, 2010. "Promising the right prize," Working Papers hal-00972957, HAL.
    20. Padfield, Rory & Tham, Mun Hou & Costes, Sophie & Smith, Laurence, 2016. "Uneven development and the commercialisation of public utilities: A political ecology analysis of water reforms in Malaysia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 152-161.
    21. Leoni, Patrick, 2011. "The antagonism of push and pull strategies, and the current funding campaigns to fight orphan diseases," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 202-205, January.

    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:eee:socmed:v:131:y:2015:i:c:p:263-271. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.