The European Health Union and the protection of public health in the European Union: Is the European Union prepared for future cross-border health threats?

The Covid 19 pandemic has cast traditional health protection issues in a new light due to their cross-border significance with far-reaching consequences for almost all areas of social life and places health protection in the European Union in a broader context that goes beyond the national consideration of necessary measures at EU Member State level. The pandemic has made it clear that the responsibility for public health remains in principle with the EU Member States and that the competences of the European Union under Article 168 TFEU are – with a few exceptions – generally limited to supporting, coordinating and assisting tasks. This article examines whether the European Union is adequately prepared for future pandemics and other cross-border health threats based on its responsibilities under the current system of competences between the EU and its Member States in the area of health policy under article 168. The article concludes with some suggestions for discussion and consideration. © 2023, The Author(s).

Sustainable Soil Management Threats Resulting from the COVID-19 Pandemic

This chapter adopts an exploratory approach towards analyzing the sustainable soil threats arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic arises from a range of coronaviruses (CoVs) which are believed to be transferable from animals to humans, and are likely to generate interaction with almost all environmental media—the land, soils on it, water and air. Soils are undisputedly the foundation for all environmental considerations, being the basic support for all forms of life. Soils are found in the environment where we live, work, play, learn and worship. Therefore, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic is both an environmental matter of grave concern as well as a public health emergency which is threatening sustainable soil management (SSM) and the entire global environment. The pandemic is not only threatening environmental wellbeing, but also the very existence of human life. Both the COVID-19 pandemic and environmental challenges such as climate change and loss of biological diversity have no boundaries and can negatively affect global SSM. This brings the enforcement of a wide range of environmental laws into perspective—waste management, natural resources conservation, pollution control, water and sanitation, including wildlife and other animal-related legislation. In most transition and developing countries, the global pandemic is manifesting alongside inadequate socio-economic bases, poor healthcare facilities, severe environmental degradation, and poor enforcement of laws and policies in the governance and environmental sectors which are closely aligned to public health. This chapter uses desktop research to explore likely threats arising from the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and whether the existing law and policy frameworks can provide effective response to the resultant SSM threats. In the wake of the COVID-19 global health challenge, any lapses in enforcing environmental laws and policies may result in worsened challenges. For instance, the global food security threat is likely to escalate owing to soil being polluted and thereby returning poor yields. In the final analysis, if the anticipated threats on SSM are not well managed, there might be significant disturbances in ecosystem support services, leading to further loss of biological diversity among other challenges. In the absence of conclusive information on the full extent of threats to SSM during and post the COVID-19 pandemic, the purpose of this exploratory chapter is to call attention to more research. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Law, human rights and gender in practice: an analysis of lessons from implementation of self-care interventions for sexual and reproductive health.

Self-care interventions for health are becoming increasingly available, and among the preferred options, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research assessed the extent of attention to laws and policies, human rights and gender in the implementation of self-care interventions for sexual and reproductive health (SRH), to identify where additional efforts to ensure an enabling environment for their use and uptake will be useful. A literature review of relevant studies published between 2010 and 2020 was conducted using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Relevant data were systematically abstracted from 61 articles. In March-April 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 key informants, selected for their experience implementing self-care interventions for SRH, and thematically analysed. Laws and policies, rights and gender are not being systematically addressed in the implementation of self-care interventions for SRH. Within countries, there is varied attention to the enabling environment including the acceptability of interventions, privacy, informed consent and gender concerns as they impact both access and use of specific self-care interventions, while other legal considerations appear to have been under-prioritised. Operational guidance is needed to develop and implement supportive laws and policies, as well as to ensure the incorporation of rights and gender concerns in implementing self-care interventions for SRH.

Pandemic Food. Rethinking agri-food after COVID-19

The relationship between unsustainable agri-food practices and the spread of foodrelated diseases has been confirmed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Current agri-food systems are not able to respond to global population growth, migration, and urbanization, nor to hunger caused by climate change and by insecurity in conflict zones. Increased food production, intensive farming, long supply chains and consumer demand – particularly for animal products – pose risks not only to human health, but also to biodiversity and the climate. Some commonalities in the history of pandemics oblige us to reflect and rethink food production and processing in a more sustainable and holistic way, as proposed in the EU Farm to Fork Strategy. © 2021 Author(s).

Evolution of the International Forest Regulation

In 2019, the World came face to face with the unprecedented challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the immediate global priority has become to tackle the global public health emergency, the long-term response must also address the underlying causes of such a pandemic. Degradation and loss of forests is one of such contributing factors disrupting nature’s balance and increasing the risk and exposure of people to zoonotic diseases. Worldwide deforestation and forest degradation are continuing at alarming rates. The underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation include the lack of good governance at both international and national levels, the undervaluation of forest products and ecosystem services and the inadequate cross-sectoral policies (e.g. policies that encourage the conversion of forestland to other uses). In order to overcome these major obstacles in combating deforestation and forest degradation it is important to provide for forest-related policy consistency and for effective policy coordination. Up until now, although in general the need for consistency and coordination has been recognized, the extent to which various environmental regimes interact concerning forest regulation and/or may be in conflict with one another remains underexploited. In order in a later step of the research to investigate the interactions and identify conflicts, gaps and synergies with regards to forest regulation, this current article sets the background and investigates the forest regulation under the international environmental law. The challenge for such investigation lies in the fragmentation of the international forest regulation: instead of a basis in a single convention or a protocol, provisions related to forests are scattered through the pieces of hard, soft and private international law. The objective of the current article is to grasp the overall scope of the international forest-related instruments and their evolution under various environmental regimes. The main methodology employed throughout the research is desktop research and legal analysis. In a chronological order the article investigates the evolution of the international forest regulation and reveals its current highly fragmented state. Following the introduction is the essential scientific background for the purpose of the legal research: a brief explanation of what constitutes “forests”, an overview of forests resources worldwide and of the current alarming rates of forests decline. In the following, the article looks at the evolution of the topic of forests in the international agenda from their first appearance up until today. For the purpose of the research three developmental stages in the evolution of the forest regulation at the international level are distinguished: the Foundational Period (i.e. before 1990) — when the scientific consensus about global deforestation and forest degradation developed and transformed from a scientific into a policy issue;the Fragmentation Period (from 1990 until 2011) — when forests entered the UN environmental agenda and gained attention as a stand-alone topic and the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) was established;and the Pre-Constitutional Period (from 2011 — onwards) — when negotiations on the Legally Binding Agreement (LBA) on forests in Europe are taking place. Finally, the conclusions bring the findings of the article together and provide the ground for subsequent legal research. © 2021 Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL). All Rights Reserved.

Flattening the Curve, Constitutional Crisis and Immigrants' Rights Protections: The Case of Israel

Despite being a small and relatively secluded country, managing the COVID-19 pandemic has so far been quite a challenge for Israel. This contribution seeks to explain how Israel had managed migration and the pandemic amidst a constitutional crisis between February and July 2020. Copyright © 2021 Kritzman-Amir.

An Antiracist Health Equity Agenda for Education.

With growing public health and health equity challenges brought to the forefront - following racialized health inequities resulting from COVID-19 and a national reckoning around the deaths of unarmed Black victims at the hands of police - an antiracist health equity agenda has emerged naming racism a public health crisis.

Risk Trade-Offs and Equitable Decision-Making in the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, societies have faced agonizing decisions about whether to close schools, shutter businesses, delay nonemergency health care, restrict travel, and authorize the use of emergency Covid-19 countermeasures under limited scientific understanding. When both action and inaction can result in significant harm and irreversible damage, decisions surrounding infection control measures become complicated. Yet ethics can help us think about hard trade-offs that weigh competing values and have deep consequences for society and particularly the most disadvantaged. This essay discusses the challenges of making policy trade-offs amid scientific uncertainty. While there may be no perfect formula for deciding what to do and when, we propose four key considerations for assessing risk-risk trade-offs and apply those considerations to the areas of education, economies, health care, travel and migration, social engagement, and medical countermeasures.

On the Legitimacy and Effectivity of the World Bank and Its Pandenic Emergency Financing Facility ('PEF') at the Time of the Covid-19 Outbreak

Pandemic financing has in the current climate of disruption and turmoil of an ongoing global pandemic become the most highly debated and controversial issue within the field of international public health law and policy. From the perspective of international public health law and policy, a precondition for success is that financial resources and funds are employed in an effective manner. Whether the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ('World Bank' or 'WB') and the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility ('PEF') - a financing mechanism housed at the WB - may be perceived as effective public health players shall be established by referring to their mandates, their inherent capacity for enhancing accepted global legal standards and rules on public health and their funding methods and practices. After the affirmation and consolidation of its role in the public health sector in the early 1990s, the WB has rapidly accredited itself as the most active intergovernmental institution dealing with pandemic and epidemic financing. Its direct involvement in public health trust funds, such as the Avian Flu Trust Fund Facility and the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Multi-Donor Fund (the HEPRF), and its lending practices and internal policies and procedures were of crucial significance in this respect. Considering that acceptance of international institutions, including international financial institutions, has always been conditioned by their acknowledgment as legally legitimate, legitimacy is regarded as closely connected to effectiveness. The criteria for establishing legitimacy in relation to international financial institutions are increasingly, amongst others, the respect and promotion of rule of law standards in the recipient states. From this perspective, the WB's functional and management structures, but not the PEF's structures and management, have made noteworthy progress, and notwithstanding some deficiencies and peculiarities they present several elements of legitimate decision-making. © KONINKLIJKE BRILL NV, LEIDEN, 2021

Latinx Immigrants' Legal Concerns About SARS-CoV-2 Testing and COVID-19 Diagnosis and Treatment.

Immigration concerns can deter immigrants from utilizing healthcare services. We examined Latinx immigrants' immigration concerns related to COVID-19 testing and treatment. A multi-state sample of 336 US Latinx immigrants (documented and undocumented) completed a cross-sectional online survey in Spanish. Factor analysis informed the construction of a COVID-19 Immigration Concerns Scale. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine associations between the scale and indices of perceived immigration risk and healthcare access and utilization. Concerns clustered around two factors: (1) providers' release of information to immigration authorities and drawing government attention; and (2) eligibility for COVID-19 services and the immigration ramifications of using these. The regression equation highlighted strong associations between these and perceived instability of immigration laws and enforcement concerns after controlling for healthcare access and utilization. COVID-19-related immigration concerns were substantial and multifaceted. Perceived instability of laws was strongly related to concerns but remains understudied.

Bidirectional legal socialization and the boundaries of law: The case of enclave communities' compliance with COVID-19 regulations.

COVID-19 has challenged people worldwide to comply with strict lock-downs and meticulous healthcare instructions. Can states harness enclave communities to comply with the law in such crucial times, even when compliance conflicts with communal sources of authority? We investigated this question through the case of Israeli ultra-Orthodox schools compliance with COVID-19 regulations. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with school principals, documents and media sources, and a field survey, we found that the state has the capacity to quickly internalize new norms and harness the cooperation of previously suspicious communities. At the same time, we found that communal authorities were able to shield widespread communal defiance from legal enforcement. These findings expose the bidirectionality of legal socialization: As the community uses its defiance power to attenuate the law, it socializes public authorities to accede to their bounded authority. As public authorities come to realize that the community cannot be brought to full compliance, they curtail enforcement efforts and socialize the community to operate outside the law. Our findings animate the reciprocity assumption in legal socialization theory and highlight one of the crucial tasks for the next 50 years of research: to examine the bidirectionality of legal socialization and discover its socio-legal effects.

COVID-19 and Health-Related Authority Allocation Puzzles.

COVID-19-related controversies concerning the allocation of scarce resources, travel restrictions, and physical distancing norms each raise a foundational question: How should authority, and thus responsibility, over healthcare and public health law and policy be allocated? Each controversy raises principles that support claims by traditional wielders of authority in "federal" countries, like federal and state governments, and less traditional entities, like cities and sub-state nations. No existing principle divides "healthcare and public law and policy" into units that can be allocated in intuitively compelling ways. This leads to puzzles concerning (a) the principles for justifiably allocating "powers" in these domains and (b) whether and how they change during "emergencies." This work motivates the puzzles, explains why resolving them should be part of long-term responses to COVID-19, and outlines some initial COVID-19-related findings that shed light on justifiable authority allocation, emergencies, emergency powers, and the relationships between them.