COVID-19 disaster recovery capitals: A conceptual framework to guide holistic and strengths-based support strategies.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: The COVID-19 pandemic bears many similarities to other disasters such as bushfires, earthquakes and floods. It also has distinctive features including its prolonged and recurrent nature and the social isolation induced by pandemic responses. Existing conceptual frameworks previously applied to the study of disaster, such as the Recovery Capitals Framework (RCF), may be useful in understanding experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic and in guiding agencies and governments tasked with supporting communities. METHODS: This paper presents an analysis of interviews conducted with residents of the Australian state of Victoria in 2020-2021. The RCF was used to analyse how participant experiences and well-being were influenced by seven forms of capital-social, human, natural, financial, built, cultural and political-with particular focus on the interactions between these capitals. RESULTS: Social capital featured most prominently in participants' accounts, yet the analysis revealed important interactions between social and other capitals that shaped their pandemic experiences. The RCF supported a strengths-based and holistic analysis while also revealing how inequities and challenges were compounded in some cases. CONCLUSIONS: Findings can be leveraged to develop effective and innovative strategies to support well-being and disrupt patterns of compounding inequity. Applying the RCF in the context of COVID-19 can help to link pandemic research with research from a wide range of disasters. SO WHAT?: In an increasingly complex global landscape of cascading and intersecting disasters including pandemics, flexible and nuanced conceptual approaches such as the RCF can generate valuable insights with practical implications for health promotion efforts.

Implementation, compliance, and pandemic legal obligations.

Negotiations ought not focus on enforcement and sanctions.

The impact of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in defending legal challenges to tobacco control measures.

BACKGROUND: Since the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control's (FCTC) entry into force, the tobacco industry has initiated litigation challenging tobacco control measures implemented by governments around the world, or supported others to initiate such litigation on its behalf. In defending their tobacco control measures against such litigation, governments have invoked their obligations and rights under the WHO FCTC. We assess the extent to which the WHO FCTC has provided legal weight to governments' defences against legal challenge. METHODS: We reviewed 96 court decisions concerning legal challenges to tobacco control measures, determining whether or not they cited the WHO FCTC and their outcomes. We then reviewed the cases where the WHO FCTC was cited, analysing how the WHO FCTC contributed to the resolution of the case. RESULTS: The WHO FCTC was cited in 45 decisions. Decisions both citing and not citing the WHO FCTC were largely decided in favour of governments, with 80% of WHO-FCTC-citing and 67% of non-WHO-FCTC-citing cases upholding the measure in its entirety and on every ground of challenge. In cases where it was cited, the WHO FCTC contributed to the resolution of the case in favour of governments by providing a legal basis for measures, demonstrating the measure's public health purpose, demonstrating the evidence in favour of a measure, demonstrating international consensus, demonstrating that a measure promotes or protects health-related human rights and demonstrating whether or not a measure is reasonable, proportionate or justifiable. CONCLUSIONS: The way the WHO FCTC has been cited in court decisions suggests that it has made a substantial contribution to courts' reasoning in tobacco control legal challenges and has strengthened governments' arguments in defending litigation.

Global cancer surgery: delivering safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery.

Surgery is essential for global cancer care in all resource settings. Of the 15.2 million new cases of cancer in 2015, over 80% of cases will need surgery, some several times. By 2030, we estimate that annually 45 million surgical procedures will be needed worldwide. Yet, less than 25% of patients with cancer worldwide actually get safe, affordable, or timely surgery. This Commission on global cancer surgery, building on Global Surgery 2030, has examined the state of global cancer surgery through an analysis of the burden of surgical disease and breadth of cancer surgery, economics and financing, factors for strengthening surgical systems for cancer with multiple-country studies, the research agenda, and the political factors that frame policy making in this area. We found wide equity and economic gaps in global cancer surgery. Many patients throughout the world do not have access to cancer surgery, and the failure to train more cancer surgeons and strengthen systems could result in as much as US $6.2 trillion in lost cumulative gross domestic product by 2030. Many of the key adjunct treatment modalities for cancer surgery--e.g., pathology and imaging--are also inadequate. Our analysis identified substantial issues, but also highlights solutions and innovations. Issues of access, a paucity of investment in public surgical systems, low investment in research, and training and education gaps are remarkably widespread. Solutions include better regulated public systems, international partnerships, super-centralisation of surgical services, novel surgical clinical trials, and new approaches to improve quality and scale up cancer surgical systems through education and training. Our key messages are directed at many global stakeholders, but the central message is that to deliver safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery to all, surgery must be at the heart of global and national cancer control planning.

Tracking the relevance of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in legislation and litigation through the online resource, Tobacco Control Laws.

The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is increasingly referenced and incorporated into the objectives, definitions and provisions of domestic legislation worldwide. It is also relied upon by courts in interpreting and upholding strong tobacco control measures challenged by the tobacco industry. In this special communication, we describe these trends and explore the important new online resource-Tobacco Control Laws (http://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org)--that has been used to track them.

Promotion of access to essential medicines for non-communicable diseases: practical implications of the UN political declaration.

Access to medicines and vaccines to prevent and treat non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is unacceptably low worldwide. In the 2011 UN political declaration on the prevention and control of NCDs, heads of government made several commitments related to access to essential medicines, technologies, and vaccines for such diseases. 30 years of experience with policies for essential medicines and 10 years of scaling up of HIV treatment have provided the knowledge needed to address barriers to long-term effective treatment and prevention of NCDs. More medicines can be acquired within existing budgets with efficient selection, procurement, and use of generic medicines. Furthermore, low-income and middle-income countries need to increase mobilisation of domestic resources to cater for the many patients with NCDs who do not have access to treatment. Existing initiatives for HIV treatment offer useful lessons that can enhance access to pharmaceutical management of NCDs and improve adherence to long-term treatment of chronic illness; policy makers should also address unacceptable inequities in access to controlled opioid analgesics. In addition to off-patent medicines, governments can promote access to new and future on-patent medicinal products through coherent and equitable health and trade policies, particularly those for intellectual property. Frequent conflicts of interest need to be identified and managed, and indicators and targets for access to NCD medicines should be used to monitor progress. Only with these approaches can a difference be made to the lives of hundreds of millions of current and future patients with NCDs.

Combating counterfeit medicines and illicit trade in tobacco products: minefields in global health governance.

This article examines two spheres of global governance in which the World Health Organization (WHO) has sought to exercise international leadership - combating "counterfeit" medicines and illicit trade in tobacco products. Medicines and tobacco products lie at polar opposite ends of the health spectrum, and are regulated for vastly different reasons and through different tools and approaches. Nevertheless, attempts to govern counterfeit trade in each of these products raise a host of somewhat similar challenges, involving normative and operational conflicts that cut across the crowded intersection of health protection and promotion, intellectual property protection, and activity to combat transnational organized crime. As negotiations of an illicit trade protocol to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control enter their final stages, lessons learned from counterfeit medicines governance need to be applied to ensure that the most appropriate governance arrangements are adopted.

Four COPs and counting: achievements, underachievements and looming challenges in the early life of the WHO FCTC Conference of the Parties.

As the governing body of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the Conference of the Parties (COP) is mandated to 'keep under regular review the implementation of the Convention and take the decisions necessary to promote its effective implementation'. The COP has a range of critical roles to play spanning the setting of normative standards, the building and dissemination of knowledge, the monitoring of implementation, the facilitation of international cooperation and the mobilisation of resources to support implementation. The COP has met four times to date. It has made significant achievements in the setting of normative standards, with the adoption of a number of high-standard implementation guidelines and a declaration recording the commitment of Parties to prioritise the implementation of health measures in the context of concerns about the effect of international trade and investment obligations. Less progress has been made in other areas, including a general lack of support for the conduct of needs assessments by developing countries-though needs assessments have been designated as a prerequisite to the mobilisation of funding support-and a reluctance to consider the adoption of a robust system of implementation review. Much remains to be done to build the FCTC's implementation support structure. Other looming challenges include maintaining the voice and influence of developing countries against priorities being overly dictated by wealthier Parties and in the face of recent cutbacks to travel support pushed by the European Union, and managing the likely resource demands and other risks of the proposed illicit trade protocol.

Opportunities and risks of the proposed FCTC protocol on illicit trade.

Illicit trade in tobacco products presents a threat to public health because it undermines the use of tax and price policies, which are among the most effective mechanisms for reducing tobacco consumption. Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) are in the final stages of negotiating a protocol aimed at strengthening international cooperation in the fight against illicit tobacco trade. While an effective multilateral response to illicit tobacco trade would make a significant contribution to global tobacco control, achieving this through the FCTC forum is challenging. First, while illicit tobacco trade is a health problem, the expertise, experience and capacity needed to combat illicit trade are not traditionally found in health agencies. The development of links with other agencies, both domestic and international, is critical to ensure both an effective response and an efficient use of limited governmental and non-governmental resources. Second, in many parts of the world, the tobacco industry cooperates closely with governments in the combating of illicit trade. This cooperation poses risks for tobacco control, particularly if relationships and norms of cooperation spill over into other areas of FCTC implementation. An examination of the industry's positioning suggests that it sees an opportunity to portray itself as 'legitimate' and 'responsible', a friend of governments, and a way to integrate itself into FCTC processes. This paper makes suggestions for moving forward in this challenging area towards ensuring that the approach taken actually reduces illicit tobacco trade, strengthens tobacco tax policies and does not operate to undermine the FCTC.

The future of tobacco regulation: a response to a proposal for fundamental institutional change.

There is much debate about the future of tobacco regulation. Some have argued that to achieve maximum possible reduction in the harm tobacco causes, new regulatory models that involve fundamental institutional change must be adopted. The tobacco industry will continue to undermine tobacco control, and, so it is argued, we must change the way in which it operates if we are to be able to make the necessary progress. Such proposals may have an immediate appeal, especially for those frustrated that progress in tobacco control is not as rapid as they would hope--with all the avoidable loss of life and livelihoods that that entails--but they need to be carefully analysed and assessed, and much thought must be applied before spending time and resources advocating for them. One such proposal, advanced by Borland, involves the establishment of a monopsonistic statutory purchasing agency and wholesale distributor of tobacco products. Borland argues the relative benefits of such a model as compared to a more "conventional" model. On close examination, the benefits of the Borland proposal, as compared to the conventional model, appear overstated, and the Borland proposal introduces significant regulatory problems. There is still much that can be achieved in tobacco regulation through more conventional approaches, and within the "existing system". We should be wary of allowing the understandable allure of new or radical approaches to distract us from this reality.