Thursday, October 18, 2012

[EQ] Global health and national borders: the ethics of foreign aid in a time of financial crisis

Global health and national borders:
the ethics of foreign aid in a time of financial crisis

Mira Johri 1, Ryoa Chung 2, Angus Dawson 3 and Ted Schrecker 4

1 Unité de Santé Internationale (USI), Centre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Canada

2 Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Montreal, Montréal, Canada

3 School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK

4 Institut de recherche Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada

Globalization and Health 2012, 8:19 doi:10.1186/1744-8603-8-19


Available online at:

“……The governments and citizens of the developed nations are increasingly called upon to contribute financially to health initiatives outside their borders. Although international development assistance for health has grown rapidly over the last two decades, austerity measures related to the 2008 and 2011 global financial crises may impact negatively on aid expenditures. The competition between national priorities and foreign aid commitments raises important ethical questions for donor nations. This paper aims to foster individual reflection and public debate on donor responsibilities for global health.


We undertook a critical review of contemporary accounts of justice. We selected theories that:
 (i) articulate important and widely held moral intuitions;
 (ii) have had extensive impact on debates about global justice;
 (iii) represent diverse approaches to moral reasoning; and
 (iv) present distinct stances on the normative importance of national borders. Due to space limitations we limit the discussion to four frameworks.


Consequentialist, relational, human rights, and social contract approaches were considered.
Responsibilities to provide international assistance were seen as significant by all four theories and place limits on the scope of acceptable national autonomy. Among the range of potential aid foci, interventions for health enjoyed consistent prominence.
The four theories concur that there are important ethical responsibilities to support initiatives to improve the health of the worst off worldwide, but offer different rationales for intervention and suggest different implicit limits on responsibilities.


Despite significant theoretical disagreements, four influential accounts of justice offer important reasons to support many current initiatives to promote global health. Ethical argumentation can complement pragmatic reasons to support global health interventions and provide an important foundation to strengthen collective action. ….”



 *      *     *
This message from the Pan American Health Organization, PAHO/WHO, is part of an effort to disseminate
information Related to: Equity; Health inequality; Socioeconomic inequality in health; Socioeconomic
health differentials; Gender; Violence; Poverty; Health Economics; Health Legislation; Ethnicity; Ethics;
Information Technology - Virtual libraries; Research & Science issues.  [DD/ KMC Area]
Washington DC USA

“Materials provided in this electronic list are provided "as is". Unless expressly stated otherwise, the findings
and interpretations included in the Materials are those of the authors and not necessarily of The Pan American
Health Organization PAHO/WHO or its country members”.
PAHO/WHO Website
Equity List - Archives - Join/remove:

IMPORTANT: This transmission is for use by the intended
recipient and it may contain privileged, proprietary or
confidential information. If you are not the intended
recipient or a person responsible for delivering this
transmission to the intended recipient, you may not
disclose, copy or distribute this transmission or take
any action in reliance on it. If you received this transmission
in error, please dispose of and delete this transmission.

Thank you.