Global health security and universal health coverage: from a marriage of convenience to a strategic, effective partnership

Abstract

Global health security and universal health coverage have been frequently considered as “two sides of the same coin”. Yet, greater analysis is required as to whether and where these two ideals converge, and what important differences exist. A consequence of ignoring their individual characteristics is to distort global and local health priorities in an effort to streamline policymaking and funding activities. This paper examines the areas of convergence and divergence between global health security and universal health coverage, both conceptually and empirically. We consider analytical concepts of risk and human rights as fundamental to both goals, but also identify differences in priorities between the two ideals. We support the argument that the process of health system strengthening provides the most promising mechanism of benefiting both goals.

From the Frontline: Strengthening Surveillance and Response Capacities of the Rural Workforce in the Asia-Pacific Region. How Can Grass-Roots Implementation Research Help?

“…There is a strong interconnection between health security (including the ability to respond to infectious disease threats) and overall health system capacity and resilience (18,19). For example, responses to the Ebola-virus outbreak in East Africa showed the variability in responses and effectiveness depending on the underlying state of the health system and governance, and highlighted the inadequacy of existing health and medical research systems to understand and respond (20).…”

“…The rural and remote health and biosecurity workforce in LMICs is an underused and fragile resource in terms of preparedness and response to emerging infectious diseases and health security. The health workforce sits squarely at the intersection between delivering universal health coverage, having strong and resilient health systems, and global health security (18). Interventions focused on improving capacity to detect and respond to existing diseases that are locally prevalent and relevant can in addition help strengthen preparedness for a possible future EID pandemic (23).…”

Control of Communicable Diseases as a Global Public Good

“…The experiences with the IHR (2005), in particular after the Ebola crisis and obvious deficits in the field of core capacity requirements in poor countries, had been at best mixed. Global Health Security as it is aimed at by the IHR cannot be secured without a basic surveillance and early response capacity in the poorest countries (weakest-link), but the "positive synergies" with HSS and UHC are quite limited [128]. UHC is a human rights-based concept with potentially vast societal externalities; to link this to the political support for GHS/IHR [129] ignores these much more farreaching social obligations.…”

‘Never let a crisis go to waste’: post-Ebola agenda-setting for health system strengthening in Guinea

“…The critical deficit of healthcare workers (HCWs) in West African countries is a major concern for global health security (GHS) and the achievement of universal health coverage (UHC) 1 2. This region hosts 3% of the global health workforce but is disproportionately confronted by 25% of the global disease burden 3…”