The Ebola Crisis and Post‐2015 Development

Abstract

This article argues that the recent Ebola crisis is the result of structural violence, as interlocking institutions have produced interlaced inequalities, unsustainabilities and insecurities. These have underlain the vulnerabilities in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea through which a disease outbreak became a major health, social and economic crisis and the local fears, distrust, rumours and resistance that magnified it further. Articulating this analysis of Ebola with broader perspectives, the case is made for a reframing of post-2015 development as transformational politics towards equality, sustainability and security, enabling people to realise well-being

Ebola and Localized Blame on Social Media: Analysis of Twitter and Facebook Conversations During the 2014–2015 Ebola Epidemic

“…By casting blame on governments during the Ebola epidemic, social media users could feel a heightened sense of citizenship power by holding authorities of supposed representativeness accountable. However, this withdrawal within oneself, with a focus on national preparedness, can decontextualize Ebola by portraying it as a border management issue, without much consideration for the socioeconomic challenges (such as poverty), that played a role in the extent of the spread of the disease in the affected countries (Leach 2015;Patterson 2015;Wright 2014).…”

Lessons from the West Africa Ebola Epidemic: A Systematic Review of Epidemiological and Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities

“…For example, on health systems, EPI studies focused on capacity gaps and needs for support [11][12][13], whereas SBS studies focused on labor recruitment/retention and community confidence in government-run health services, including local perceptions of their morality and ethics before and during the epidemic [14][15][16]. Social and behavioral science analyses also attempted to directly integrate historical underdevelopment, systemic injustices, patterns of structural and political violence, and governmental malfeasance into their analyses [17][18][19]. Risk factors, such as sex, also involved thematic splits.…”

What is Global Development?

“…Thus, these are public issues which transcend the ability of individual states to effectively address. Global public goods are very significant collective challenges for the whole world, not just the Global South (eg Sumner and Tiwari 2010;Sachs 2012;Leach 2015;Kanbur 2017). Moreover, successfully addressing the issue of global public goods is an important benefit for all countries, not just for those in the Global South.…”

“…Global public goods (eg Sumner and Tiwari 2010;Sachs 2012;Leach 2015) have huge relevance as a collective challenge, which can affect all parts of the world. Issues that have been identified across the three domains of economic, human and environment include financial stability and arguably taxation cooperation, treatments for serious global diseases, and mitigation of carbon emissions and adaptation to climate change (Alonso 2012; Leach 2015). As recognised most recently and prominently in the Paris Agreement of 2015, for example, climate change is an enormous development challenge, and one with significant consequences for all countries.…”

“…Rather than a group of experts from one place telling a subordinate group from another what to do, a charge often raised within and against international development, a global development perspective augments the need for greater mutual learning, and associated collaborative action, across and within the Global North and South (McFarlane 2006;Mehta et al 2006;Sumner 2011;Leach 2015;Longhurst 2017). For example, Mehta et al (2006) have argued that development research should focus on both rich and poor countries, forging new relationships including between northern and southern researchers.…”