A Pandemic Instrument can Optimize the Regime Complex for AMR by Striking a Balance between Centralization and Decentralization.

Global antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is currently governed by a decentralized regime complex composed of multiple institutions with overlapping and sometimes conflicting principles, norms, rules, and procedures. Such a decentralized regime complex provides certain advantages and disadvantages when compared to a centralized regime. A pandemic instrument can optimize the regime complex for AMR by leveraging the strengths of both centralization and decentralization. Existing climate treaties under the UNFCCC offer lessons for achieving this hybrid approach.

A Pandemic Instrument Can Start Turning Collective Problems into Collective Solutions by Governing the Common-Pool Resource of Antimicrobial Effectiveness.

To address the complex challenge of global antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a pandemic treaty should include mechanisms that 1) equitably address the access gap for antimicrobials, diagnostic technologies, and alternative therapies; 2) equitably conserve antimicrobials to sustain effectiveness and access across time and space; 3) equitably finance the investment, discovery, development, and distribution of new technologies; and 4) equitably finance and establish greater upstream and midstream infection prevention measures globally. Biodiversity, climate, and nuclear governance offer lessons for addressing these challenges.

Adopting a Global AMR Target within the Pandemic Instrument Will Act as a Catalyst for Action.

Ensuring that life-saving antimicrobials remain available as effective treatment options in the face of rapidly rising levels of antimicrobial resistance will require a massive and coordinated global effort. Setting a collective direction for progress is the first step towards aligning global efforts on AMR. This process would be greatly accelerated by adopting a unifying global target - a well-defined global target that unites all countries and sectors. The proposed pandemic instrument - with its focus on prevention, preparedness and response - represents an ideal opportunity to develop and adopt a unifying global target that catalyzes global action on AMR. We propose three key characteristics of a unifying global target for AMR that - if embedded within the pandemic preparedness instrument - could rally public support, funding, and political commitment commensurate with the scale of the AMR challenge.

Quasi-experimental evaluation of national border closures on COVID-19 transmission

With over 200 pandemic threats emerging every year, the efficacy of closing national borders to control the transmission of disease in the first months of a pandemic remains a critically important question. Previous studies offer conflicting evidence for the potential effects of these closures on COVID-19 transmission and no study has yet empirically evaluated the global impact of border closures using quasi-experimental methods and real-world data. We triangulate results from interrupted time-series analysis, meta-regression, coarsened exact matching, and an extensive series of robustness checks to evaluate the effect of 166 countries' national border closures on the global transmission of COVID-19. Total border closures banning non-essential travel from all countries and (to a lesser extent) targeted border closures banning travel from specific countries had some effect on temporarily slowing COVID-19 transmission in those countries that implemented them. In contrast to these country-level impacts, the global sum of targeted border closures implemented by February 5, 2020 was not sufficient to slow global COVID-19 transmission, but the sum of total border closures implemented by March 19, 2020 did achieve this effect. Country-level results were highly heterogeneous, with early implementation and border closures so broadly targeted that they resemble total border closures improving the likelihood of slowing the pandemic's spread. Governments that can make productive use of extra preparation time and cannot feasibly implement less restrictive alternatives might consider enacting border closures. However, given their moderate and uncertain impacts and their significant harms, border closures are unlikely to be the best policy response for most countries and should only be deployed in rare circumstances and with great caution. All countries would benefit from global mechanisms to coordinate national decisions on border closures during pandemics.

Antimicrobial Resistance Must Be Included in the Pandemic Instrament to Ensure Future Global Pandemic Readiness.

Governments can practically and efficiently address zoonoses and AMR -- within the text of the new pandemic instrument. We map the overlaps between the efforts needed to address both pandemic threats, including (a) equitable access to medical countermeasures, (b) globally integrated One Health surveillance and monitoring systems, (c) increased technical and laboratory capacity in low- and middle-income countries, and (d) a regulatory framework governing the stewardship of antimicrobials. By outlining potential dual-purpose provisions that could be included in a pandemic instrument, we argue that addressing AMR in the pandemic instrument is practicable, the most effective use of limited time and resources, and provides the best opportunity for future global pandemic readiness.

Embed Multisectoral Governance Mechanisms in the Pandemic Instrument for One Health Action.

Despite recognition of the health threat posed at the human-animal-environment interface long ago, One Health has yet to be meaningfully integrated into global pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. With the negotiation of the forthcoming pandemic instrument under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO) - which is inherently restricted by its own constitutional mandate of human health - One Health risks being sidelined once again. Genuine integration of a One Health approach into this treaty will require the institutionalization of formal One Health coordination mechanisms.

Using the International Pandemic Instrument to Revitalize the Innovation Ecosystem for Antimicrobial R&D.

The inclusion of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and increased research and development (R&D) capabilities in the most recent outline of the World Health Organization's (WHO's) international pandemic instrument signals an opportunity to reshape pharmaceutical R&D system in favour of antimicrobial product development. This article explains why the current innovation ecosystem has disadvantaged the creation of antimicrobial products for human use. It also highlights how the COVID-19 pandemic experience can inform and stimulate international cooperation to implement innovative R&D incentives to bring new, life-saving antimicrobial products to the market.

A Global Pandemic Treaty Must Address Antimicrobial Resistance.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the defining global health threats of our time, but no international legal instrument currently offers the framework and mechanisms needed to address it. Fortunately, the actions needed to address AMR have considerable overlap with the actions needed to confront other pandemic threats.

Tensions and opportunities in the roles of senior public health officials in Canada: A qualitative study.

Although public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic thrust senior public health officials into the spotlight, their day-to-day roles remain misunderstood and under-examined. In jurisdictions that follow the Westminster system of government such as Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, Chief Medical Officers of Health (CMOHs) are typically senior public servants who are simultaneously positioned as public health professionals with independent expertise, senior advisors to an elected government, and designated protectors of the public health interest. Using Canada's federal and provincial CMOHs as case studies of this role in Westminster governments, we analyzed in-depth key informant interview data to examine how CMOHs navigate the tensions among their duties to the government, profession, and public in order to maximize their public health impact. We demonstrate that CMOHs are variously called upon to be government advisors, public health managers, and public communicators, and that the different emphasis that jurisdictions place on these roles shapes the tools and pathways through which CMOHs can influence government action and public health. We also elucidate the tensions associated with having CMOHs positioned within the senior levels of the public service and the strategies these officials use to balance their internal- and external-facing roles. Finally, we highlight the trade-offs among different institutional design options to inform decisions about the structure of the CMOH position in different contexts.

Principles and methods of global legal epidemiology.

Although the theory and methods of legal epidemiology-the scientific study and deployment of law as a factor in the cause, distribution, and prevention of disease and injury in a population-have been well developed in the context of domestic law, the challenges posed by shifting the frame of analysis to the global legal space have not yet been fully explored. While legal epidemiology rests on the foundational principles that law acts as an intervention, that law can be an object of scientific study and that law has impacts that should be evaluated, its application to the global level requires the recognition that international laws, policies and norms can cause effects independently from their legal implementation within countries. The global legal space blurs distinctions between 'hard' and 'soft' law, often operating through pathways of global agenda setting, legal language, political pressures, social mobilisation and trade pressures to have direct impacts on people, places and products. Despite these complexities, international law has been overwhelmingly studied as operating solely through national policy change, with only one global quasi-experimental evaluation of an international law's impact on health published to date. To promote greater adoption of global legal epidemiology, we expand on an existing typology of public health law studies with examples of policymaking, mapping, implementation, intervention and mechanism studies. Global legal epidemiology holds great promise as a way to produce rigorous and impactful research on the international laws, policies and norms that shape our collective health, equity and well-being.

Failing Forward: How Human Rights Failures in Governments' COVID-19 Responses Can Inform the Development of International Human Rights Law

Despite the pandemic's widespread and transnational impact on human rights, both solidarity and human rights have been side-lined in key intergovernmental discussions on global health law reform to date, while conversations about the development of international human rights law seldom consider global health law's import to the field. This article argues that in spite of states' apparent reluctance to reconcile and harmonise global health law and international human rights law for fairer and more effective public health emergency preparedness and response, international law experts and practitioners are well-placed to indirectly influence normative development in this direction, drawing on their past successes in clarifying and elaborating upon informal international legal standards. Merging strengths from existing legal frameworks of global health law and international human rights law, such expert standard setting efforts can help reimagine a "progressively harmonised" framework of legal regimes for public health emergency preparedness and response. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Community Law Review is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Governing Global Antimicrobial Resistance: 6 Key Lessons Fromthe Paris Climate Agreement

[...]mitigating the threat posed by AMR requires a recognition of how embedded social structures and incentives drive antimicrobial use across sectors. [...]escalating commitments through national AMR action plans, which outline each country's AMR goals and planned actions, will likely increase the effectiveness of global AMR efforts. Fifth, like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change guiding the Paris Agreement, ongoing AMR action would be best informed by a regular and independent stock-taking to evaluate existing measures and advise on evidence-informed adjustments.11,12 This endeavor must (1) recognize that different ways of knowing constitute the global knowledge base, (2) ensure that using evidence to inform adjustments that work does not detract from the inherently political questions of works for what purpose and for whose benefit, and (3) come with a commitment to equitable evidence generation and prioritization. Striking a panel to assess the global knowledge base on these terms will ensure that global, regional, and national goals and policies are continually informed by the best available evidence and are in line with leading practices.12 Finally, an enduring international legal agreement could institutionalize requires new legal mechanisms beyond those available through the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the World Organization for Animal Health, and the United Nations Environment Program, which are limited to the area-specific mandates of each institution.

Under the spotlight: understanding the role of the Chief Medical Officer in a pandemic.

As the COVID-19 pandemic took hold in 2020, Chief Medical Officers (CMOs) entered the public spotlight like never before. Amidst this increased visibility, the role is deeply contested. Much of the disagreement concerns whether CMOs should act independently of the government: while some argue CMOs should act as independent voices who work to shape government policy to protect public health, others stress that CMOs are civil servants whose job is to support the government. The scope and diversity of debates about the CMO role can be explained by its inherently contradictory nature, which requires incumbents to balance their commitments as physicians with their mandates as civil servants who advise and speak on the government's behalf. The long-haul COVID-19 pandemic has further tested the CMO role and has shone light on its varying remits and expectations across different jurisdictions, institutions and contexts. It is perhaps unsurprising, then, that calls to amend the CMO role have emerged in some jurisdictions during the pandemic. However, any discussions about changing the CMO role need a stronger understanding of how different institutional and individual approaches impact what incumbents feel able to do, say and achieve. Based on an ongoing comparative analysis of the position across five countries with Westminster-style political systems, we provide an overview of the CMO role, explain its prominence in a pandemic, examine some debates surrounding the role and discuss a few unanswered empirical questions before describing our ongoing study in greater detail.

A global public health convention for the 21st century.

As shown by COVID-19, infectious diseases with a pandemic potential present a grave threat to health and wellbeing. Although the International Health Regulations provide a framework of binding legal obligations for pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, many countries do not comply with these regulations. There is a need for a renewed framework for global collective action that ensures conformity with international regulations and promotes effective prevention and response to pandemic infectious diseases. This Health Policy identifies the necessary characteristics for a new global public health security convention designed to optimise prevention, preparedness, and response to pandemic infectious diseases. We propose ten recommendations to strengthen global public health governance and promote compliance with global health security regulations. Recommendations for a new global public health security convention include greater authority for a global governing body, an improved ability to respond to pandemics, an objective evaluation system for national core public health capacities, more effective enforcement mechanisms, independent and sustainable funding, representativeness, and investment from multiple sectors, among others. The next steps to achieve these recommendations include assembling an invested alliance, specifying the operational structures of a global public health security system, and overcoming barriers such as insufficient political will, scarcity of resources, and individual national interests.

Key considerations on the potential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on antimicrobial resistance research and surveillance.

Antibiotic use in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has exceeded the incidence of bacterial coinfections and secondary infections, suggesting inappropriate and excessive prescribing. Even in settings with established antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes, there were weaknesses exposed regarding appropriate antibiotic use in the context of the pandemic. Moreover, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance and AMS have been deprioritised with diversion of health system resources to the pandemic response. This experience highlights deficiencies in AMR containment and mitigation strategies that require urgent attention from clinical and scientific communities. These include the need to implement diagnostic stewardship to assess the global incidence of coinfections and secondary infections in COVID-19 patients, including those by multidrug-resistant pathogens, to identify patients most likely to benefit from antibiotic treatment and identify when antibiotics can be safely withheld, de-escalated or discontinued. Long-term global surveillance of clinical and societal antibiotic use and resistance trends is required to prepare for subsequent changes in AMR epidemiology, while ensuring uninterrupted supply chains and preventing drug shortages and stock outs. These interventions present implementation challenges in resource-constrained settings, making a case for implementation research on AMR. Knowledge and support for these practices will come from internationally coordinated, targeted research on AMR, supporting the preparation for future challenges from emerging AMR in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic or future pandemics.

Antimicrobial resistance research in a post-pandemic world: Insights on antimicrobial resistance research in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Antimicrobial resistance must be recognised as a global societal priority - even in the face of the worldwide challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 has illustrated the vulnerability of our healthcare systems in co-managing multiple infectious disease threats as resources for monitoring and detecting, and conducting research on antimicrobial resistance have been compromised during the pandemic. The increased awareness of the importance of infectious diseases, clinical microbiology and infection control and lessons learnt during the COVID-19 pandemic should be exploited to ensure that emergence of future infectious disease threats, including those related to AMR, are minimised. Harnessing the public understanding of the relevance of infectious diseases towards the long-term pandemic of AMR could have major implications for promoting good practices about the control of AMR transmission.

The Promise of Science, Knowledge Mobilization, and Rapid Learning Systems for COVID-19 Recovery.

The health, economic, and social crises created by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have been global in scope and inequitable in impact. The global road to recovery can be enhanced with robust, relevant, and timely scientific evidence. This commentary seeks to illustrate the power of science, scientific collaboration, and innovative research funding programs to inform pandemic recovery and inspire transformational changes for a more equitable, resilient, and sustainable future. Specifically, this commentary provides an introduction to the United Nations (UN) Research Roadmap for the COVID-19 Recovery that was published in November 2020. It introduces 5 scoping reviews that helped inform the UN Research Roadmap and that are now available open access within this series of special papers, and it provides an overview of an innovative research funding program that facilitated rapid mobilization and collaboration to produce the scoping reviews. The publication of the scoping reviews in this journal series will help complement and amplify the UN Research Roadmap by furthering knowledge mobilization efforts and informing COVID-19 recovery around the world, to ensure a more equitable, resilient, and sustainable postpandemic future.

Lessons learned from COVID-19 for the post-antibiotic future.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has rapidly and radically changed the face of human health and social interaction. As was the case with COVID-19, the world is similarly unprepared to respond to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and the challenges it will produce. COVID-19 presents an opportunity to examine how the international community might better respond to the growing AMR threat. MAIN BODY: The impacts of COVID-19 have manifested in health system, economic, social, and global political implications. Increasing AMR will also present challenges in these domains. As seen with COVID-19, increasing healthcare usage and resource scarcity may lead to ethical dilemmas about prioritization of care; unemployment and economic downturn may disproportionately impact people in industries reliant on human interaction (especially women); and international cooperation may be compromised as nations strive to minimize outbreaks within their own borders. CONCLUSION: AMR represents a slow-moving disaster that offers a unique opportunity to proactively develop interventions to mitigate its impact. The world's attention is currently rightfully focused on responding to COVID-19, but there is a moral imperative to take stock of lessons learned and opportunities to prepare for the next global health emergency.

Communication about COVID-19 from Canadian provincial chief medical officers of health: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, Canada's provincial chief medical officers of health (CMOHs) have provided regular updates on the pandemic response. We sought to examine whether their messaging varied over time and whether it varied across jurisdictions. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of news releases from Canadian provincial government websites during the initial phases of the COVID-19 outbreak between Jan. 21 and Mar. 31, 2020. We performed content analysis using a predefined data extraction framework to derive themes. RESULTS: We identified 290 news releases. Four broad thematic categories emerged: describing the government's preparedness and capacity building, issuing recommendations and mandates, expressing reassurance and encouraging the public, and promoting public responsibility. Most of the news releases were prescriptive, conveying recommendations and mandates to slow transmission. Cross-jurisdictional variations in messaging reflected local realities, such as evidence of community transmission. Messaging also reflected changing information about the pandemic over time, shifting from a tone of reassurance early on, to a sudden emphasis on social distancing measures, to a concern with public responsibility to slow transmission. INTERPRETATION: Messaging across jurisdictions was generally consistent, and variations in the tone and timing of CMOH messaging aligned with different and changing realities across contexts. These findings indicate that when evaluating CMOHs' statements, it is critical to consider the context of the information they possess, the epidemiologic circumstances in their jurisdiction and the way the province has structured the CMOH role.