Rethinking Institutional Independence

IF 0.8 3区 社会学 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Stephanie Strobl
{"title":"Rethinking Institutional Independence","authors":"Stephanie Strobl","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02801004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines institutional independence using the examples of the World Health Organization (WHO) and of the Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC s) in a theoretical and a practical approach. It highlights the two different sources of authority of the WHO Secretariat, based on conditional negotiated legitimacy and epistemologically derived legitimacy, and how this authority is threatened by an increase in state party influence beyond what is envisaged in the WHO’s institutional setup. As a practical example, the article uses the PHEIC determinations, when the criteria as set out in the International Health Regulations (IHR) are not sufficient to explain the director-general’s decision to determine a PHEIC. Instead, this article offers evidence of state party influence. This challenge to the WHO’s legitimacy leads to a lack of institutional independence and, subsequently, to a declining basis for cooperation.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02801004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines institutional independence using the examples of the World Health Organization (WHO) and of the Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC s) in a theoretical and a practical approach. It highlights the two different sources of authority of the WHO Secretariat, based on conditional negotiated legitimacy and epistemologically derived legitimacy, and how this authority is threatened by an increase in state party influence beyond what is envisaged in the WHO’s institutional setup. As a practical example, the article uses the PHEIC determinations, when the criteria as set out in the International Health Regulations (IHR) are not sufficient to explain the director-general’s decision to determine a PHEIC. Instead, this article offers evidence of state party influence. This challenge to the WHO’s legitimacy leads to a lack of institutional independence and, subsequently, to a declining basis for cooperation.
重新思考机构独立性
本文以世界卫生组织(世界卫生组织)和国际关注的突发公共卫生事件(PHEIC)为例,探讨了机构独立性 s) 以理论和实践的方法。它强调了世界卫生组织秘书处基于有条件谈判的合法性和认识论衍生的合法性的两种不同的权力来源,以及这一权力如何因缔约国影响力的增加而受到威胁,超出了世界卫生组织机构设置的设想。作为一个实际例子,当《国际卫生条例》(IHR)中规定的标准不足以解释总干事确定PHEIC的决定时,本文使用PHEIC确定。相反,这篇文章提供了缔约国影响力的证据。这一对世界卫生组织合法性的挑战导致机构缺乏独立性,随后导致合作基础不断下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Governance
Global Governance INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
22
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信