ABSTRACT
Anthropologists Craig Janes and Kitty Corbett (2009, 168) argue that ‘global health has come to occupy a new and different kind of political space that demands the study of population health in the context of power relations in a world system’. In various ways, the contributions to this volume all emphasize this point. So, too, does the context of uncertainty in which the manuscript of this volume was finalized. As noted in the introduction, the NCD Summit was on many accounts compromised by the influence of commercial interests; the importance of this point was emphasized by post-Summit suggestions that at least one G8 government (Canada’s) sought to weaken elements of the concluding political declaration that emphasized corporate responsibilities and the relevance of trade policy (Webster 2011). The World Conference on Social Determinants of Health generated a declaration similarly, if perhaps predictably, lacking in specifics. Perhaps more disturbing was the attitude of many participating governments, as described after the conference by Sir Michael Marmot, who chaired the Commission that gave rise to it: ‘The word on the street was that there were objections to the Commission’s strong emphasis on inequities in power, money and resources. Trying to convince poor people to eat vegetables is one thing, acceptable and safe; attacking the inequity in power, money and resources is altogether less safe’ (Marmot 2011). And the debates about reform at WHO referred to in Chapter 11, driven by budget shortfalls that led to layoffs of hundreds of staff in Geneva, were still under way, with concerns persisting that the unavoidable effect would be to give the suppliers of discretionary funds that make up three-quarters of the organization’s budget even more influence over its priorities (Collier 2012).
