The oversecuritization of global health: Changing the terms of debate

53Citations
Citations of this article
138Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Linking health and security has become a mainstream approach to health policy issues over the past two decades. So much so that the discourse of global health security has become close to synonymous with global health, their meanings being considered almost interchangeable. While the debates surrounding the health-security nexus vary in levels of analysis from the global to the national to the individual, this article argues that the consideration of health as a security issue, and the ensuing path dependencies, have shifted in three ways. First, the concept has been broadened to the extent that a multitude of health issues (and others) are constructed as threats to health security. Second, securitizing health has moved beyond a rhetorical device to include the direct involvement of the security sector. Third, the performance of health security has become a security threat in itself. These considerations, the article argues, alter the remit of the global health security narrative; the global health community needs to recognize this shift and adapt its use of security-focused policies accordingly.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wenham, C. (2019). The oversecuritization of global health: Changing the terms of debate. International Affairs, 95(5), 1093–1110. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz170

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free