IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgd/wpaper/717.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding Different Stakeholders' Priorities for an Independent Panel on Evidence for Action on AMR

Author

Listed:
  • Misbah Khan

    (Research Consultant, Center for Global Development)

  • Ayodele A. Akinyele

    (Postdoctoral Researcher, Leveraging Bacterial Genomics for Health Solutions in Africa, Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, University of Ibadan)

  • Emmanuel Olamijuwon

    (Lecturer in Social and Health Data Science/Literacy, University of St. Andrews)

  • Anthony McDonnell

    (Center for Global Development)

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing global threat that demands coordinated, cross-sectoral action rooted in rigorous evidence and inclusive governance. In response to calls for an Independent Panel on Evidence for Action against AMR, this working paper presents insights from a global consultation process involving 60 experts and stakeholders across human, animal, and environmental health, policy, academia, civil society, and industry. The findings highlight key considerations for the panel’s formation, including the need for equitable representation, scientific and political legitimacy, sustained funding, and practical mechanisms to ensure evidence translation into action. Stakeholders advocate for a hybrid governance model, strategic partnerships rather than structural dependencies, and transparent, participatory processes. According to stakeholders, the panel must be context-sensitive, responsive to low- and middle-income country priorities, and capable of guiding both global coherence and locally meaningful implementation. This paper offers a roadmap for designing an independent panel that can credibly and effectively support the global response to AMR.

Suggested Citation

  • Misbah Khan & Ayodele A. Akinyele & Emmanuel Olamijuwon & Anthony McDonnell, 2025. "Understanding Different Stakeholders' Priorities for an Independent Panel on Evidence for Action on AMR," Working Papers 717, Center for Global Development.
    • Handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/understanding-different-stakeholders-priorities-independent-panel-evidence-action-amr?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antimicrobial resistance (AMR); stakeholder engagement; evidence-based policy; global health governance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cgd:wpaper:717. 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: Publications Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgdevus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.