Global health governance performance during Covid-19, what needs to be changed? a delphi survey study

Abstract

Background: Covid-19 is not the first pandemic to challenge GHG. Preceding outbreaks and epidemics were sources of continuous debate on GHG leadership and structure resulting in its current structure. However, Covid-19 proved the presence of many deficits in the current GHG. The response to the Covid-19 pandemic is a cumulative result of all policies and actions of different governments and agencies active in global health. Assessing how Covid-19 is being handled globally provides lessons for ensuring better performance in facing upcoming outbreaks. This study has three main objectives: first, to evaluate the performance of GHG during Covid-19 in general and in relation to Covid-19 vaccine equity in particular. Second, to identify the reasons behind this performance; and third, to propose prospective changes in GHG for better performance. Methods: A cross-sectional research design using the Delphi method was applied. A panel of experts participated in the three-round Delphi surveys. Their scores were used to perform consensus, performance and correlation analysis. Results: GHG performance limited the achievement of Covid-19 vaccines’ global equity. GHG performance is a product of the existing GHG system, its actors and legal framework. It is a collective result of individual GHG actors’ performance. The most influential actors in decision-making regarding Covid-19 vaccine are the vaccine manufacturers and governments. While the most invoked power to influence decision are economic and political powers. Covid-19 decisions underlying value, although had human right to health at the base, overlooked the concept of health as a global public good and was skewed towards market-oriented values. GHG mal-performance along with its underlying factors calls for four main changes in GHG structure: assigning a clear steward for GHG, enhanced accountability, centralized authority, more equitable representation of actors, and better legal framework. Conclusion: GHG structure, actors’ representation, accountability system, and underlying priorities and value require future modification for GHG to achieve better future performance and higher health equity levels.