Author
Listed:
- Jean-Louis Denis
- Gaëlle Foucault
- Pierre Larouche
- Catherine Régis
- Miriam Cohen
- Marie-Andrée Girard
Abstract
The paper focuses on the role of the World Health Organization (WHO) in promoting a healthy world population as a generative and robust idea within health policy. The WHO’s health credo transcends national boundaries to promote health globally. It is embedded in norms, values, and standards promulgated by the organization and contributes in shaping the health responses of national governments. Ideational robustness refers to the ability of the WHO to adapt its health credo to changing contexts and circumstances, thus promoting the legitimacy of an international health order. Disturbances, including the Covid-19 pandemic, test the credo’s robustness, forcing the WHO to constantly work at reframing ideas to adapt to political forces and competing logics that structure the field of international health. Empirically, the paper is based on an historical analysis of the evolution of the health credo of the WHO since its inception. Qualitative content analysis of secondary sources, such as policy documents, explores how ideational work performed by WHO leaders impacts on the organization’s position and legitimacy. Ideational robustness appears to be largely influenced by leadership vision, preexisting organizational structure, and the political economy of international health. Ideational robustness appears as a powerful yet insufficient ingredient of policy success.
Suggested Citation
Jean-Louis Denis & Gaëlle Foucault & Pierre Larouche & Catherine Régis & Miriam Cohen & Marie-Andrée Girard, 2024.
"The World Health Organization as an engine of ideational robustness,"
Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 43(2), pages 204-224.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:43:y:2024:i:2:p:204-224.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:43:y:2024:i:2:p:204-224.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.