Explore the vast range of titles available.

Have the revised International Health Regulations allowed states to rise to the challenge of delivering global health security? In the age of air travel and globalized trade, pathogens that once took months or even years to spread beyond their regions of origin can now circumnavigate the globe in a matter of hours. Amid growing concerns about such epidemics as Ebola, SARS, MERS, and H1N1, disease diplomacy has emerged as a key foreign and security policy concern as countries work to collectively strengthen the global systems of disease surveillance and control. The revision of the International Health Regulations (IHR), eventually adopted by the World Health Organization's member states in 2005, was the foremost manifestation of this novel diplomacy. The new regulations heralded a profound shift in international norms surrounding global health security, significantly expanding what is expected of states in the face of public health emergencies and requiring them to improve their capacity to detect and contain outbreaks. Drawing on Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink's \"norm life cycle\" framework and based on extensive documentary analysis and key informant interviews, Disease Diplomacy traces the emergence of these new norms of global health security, the extent to which they have been internalized by states, and the political and technical constraints governments confront in attempting to comply with their new international obligations. The authors also examine in detail the background, drafting, adoption, and implementation of the IHR while arguing that the very existence of these regulations reveals an important new understanding: that infectious disease outbreaks and their management are critical to national and international security. The book will be of great interest to academic researchers, postgraduate students, and advanced undergraduates in the fields of global public health, international relations, and public policy, as well as health professionals, diplomats, and practitioners with a professional interest in global health security.

This book examines Southeast Asia's rejection of international refugee law through extensive archival analysis and argues that this rejection was shaped by the region's response to its largest refugee crisis in the post-1945 era: the Indochinese refugee crisis from 1975-1996.

In Responsibility to Protect and Women, Peace and Security: Aligning the Protection Agendas, editors Sara E. Davies, Zim Nwokora, Eli Stamnes and Sarah Teitt address the intersections of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle and the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda. Contributions from policy-makers and academics consider both the merits and the utility of aligning the protection agendas of R2P and WPS. A number of actionable recommendations are made concerning a unification of the agendas to best support the global empowerment of women and the prevention of mass atrocities.

This book provides an in-depth introduction to, and analysis of, the issues relating to the implementation of the recent Responsibility to Protect principle in international relations The Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) has come a long way in a short space of time. It was endorsed by the General Assembly of the UN in 2005, and unanimously reaffirmed by the Security Council in 2006 (Resolution 1674) and 2009 (Resolution 1894). UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has identified the challenge of implementing RtoP as one of the cornerstones of his Secretary-Generalship. The principle has also become part of the working language of international engagement with humanitarian crises and has been debated in relation to almost every recent international crisis – including Sudan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Georgia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Darfur and Somalia. Concentrating mainly on implementation challenges including the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities, strengthening the UN’s capacity to respond, and the role of regional organizations, this book introducing readers to contemporary debates on R2P and provides the first book-length analysis of the implementation agenda. The book will be of great interest to students of the responsibility to protect, humanitarian intervention, human rights, foreign policy, security studies and IR and politics in general. Alex J. Bellamy is Professor of International Security at the Griffith Asia Institute/Centre for Governance and Public Policy, Griffith University, Australia. From 2007–2010 he was Executive Director of the Asia-Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Introduction 1. From Idea to Norm 2. Implementing RtoP at the UN 3. Humanitarian Crises since 2005 4. An Assessment after Five Years 5. Economic Development and Democratisation 6. Early Warning 7. Regional Arrangements (with Sara E. Davies) 8. The UN Security Council and the Use of Force Conclusion 'Alex Bellamy, one of the most competent students and advocates of the ‘respon sibility to protect’ (often abbreviated as ‘R2P’), provides a very timely and useful account of the origins of this notion, of its evolution, and of its successes and failures between 2005 (when it was endorsed by the General Assembly of the United Nations) and 2010.' - Pierre Hasner, Survival, Vol. 53:5, Oct - Nov 2011 ‘Alex Bellamy here builds on his previous book on the subject (published 2008) which greeted the establishment of R2P as a key aspect of how the world would be (politically) managed in the new millennium. This new book, revealingly subtitled \"From Words to Deeds\" examines, after the first five years of formal establishment, what impact R2P has actually had. [...] Bellamy’s book will find its way on to essential reading lists almost immediately.’ – Christopher May, Lancaster University, Political Studies Review, Vol 10:3, Sept. 2012

This edited collection has sought contributions from some of the foremost scholars of refugee and Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) studies to engage with the conceptual and practical difficulties entailed in realising how the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) can be fulfilled by states and the international community to protect vulnerable persons.

Die globalen gesundheitlichen und sozialen Folgen der COVID-19 Pandemie sind noch lange nicht ausgestanden. Im Global Governance Spotlight 2|2020 zieht Sara Davies, Professorin an der australischen Griffith Universität, eine erste Bilanz des internationalen Krisenmanagements. Dabei macht sie auf wichtige Fortschritte im Vergleich zu früheren Pandemien aufmerksam - von der Infektionsmeldung und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit bis zum Menschenrechtsschutz. Bei aller berechtigten Kritik kann die Globale Gesundheitsgovernance aus diesen Aspekten lernen und darauf aufbauen.

The optimal target for systemic oxygenation in critically ill children is unknown. Liberal oxygenation is widely practiced, but has been associated with harm in paediatric patients. We aimed to evaluate whether conservative oxygenation would reduce duration of organ support or incidence of death compared to standard care. Oxy-PICU was a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in 15 UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Children admitted as an emergency, who were older than 38 weeks corrected gestational age and younger than 16 years receiving invasive ventilation and supplemental oxygen were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio via a concealed, central, web-based randomisation system to conservative peripheral oxygen saturations ([SpO2] 88–92%) or liberal (SpO2 >94%) targets. The primary outcome was the duration of organ support at 30 days following random allocation, a rank-based endpoint with death either on or before day 30 as the worst outcome (a score equating to 31 days of organ support), with survivors assigned a score between 1 and 30 depending on the number of calendar days of organ support received. The primary effect estimate was the probabilistic index, a value greater than 0·5 indicating more than 50% probability that conservative oxygenation is superior to liberal oxygenation for a randomly selected patient. All participants in whom consent was available were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The completed study was registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN92103439). Between Sept 1, 2020, and May 15, 2022, 2040 children were randomly allocated to conservative or liberal oxygenation groups. Consent was available for 1872 (92%) of 2040 children. The conservative oxygenation group comprised 939 children (528 [57%] of 927 were female and 399 [43%] of 927 were male) and the liberal oxygenation group included 933 children (511 [56%] of 920 were female and 409 [45%] of 920 were male). Duration of organ support or death in the first 30 days was significantly lower in the conservative oxygenation group (probabilistic index 0·53, 95% CI 0·50–0·55; p=0·04 Wilcoxon rank-sum test, adjusted odds ratio 0·84 [95% CI 0·72–0·99]). Prespecified adverse events were reported in 24 (3%) of 939 patients in the conservative oxygenation group and 36 (4%) of 933 patients in the liberal oxygenation group. Among invasively ventilated children who were admitted as an emergency to a PICU receiving supplemental oxygen, a conservative oxygenation target resulted in a small, but significant, greater probability of a better outcome in terms of duration of organ support at 30 days or death when compared with a liberal oxygenation target. Widespread adoption of a conservative oxygenation saturation target (SpO2 88–92%) could help improve outcomes and reduce costs for the sickest children admitted to PICUs. UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.