School of Public Policy, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
School of Public Policy, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jul;8(7). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012615.
During Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEICs), The International Health Regulations (IHR) require the WHO to issue Temporary Recommendations on the use of international travel and trade measures. During the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO's initial recommendation against 'any travel or trade restriction' has been questioned, and virtually all countries subsequently used international travel measures. WHO's Recommendations to States Parties also changed over the course of the pandemic. There is a need to understand how WHO's treatment of this issue compared with other PHEICs and why States Parties' actions diverged from WHO's initial Recommendations. This first analysis of WHO's Temporary Recommendations on international travel and trade measures during all seven PHEICs compares the guidance for clarity and consistency in several areas of substance and process. We find that lack of clarity and inconsistency in WHO guidance makes it difficult to interpret and relate back to IHR obligations. Based on this analysis, we offer recommendations to increase consistency and clarity of WHO's guidance on this issue during global health emergencies.
在国际关注的突发公共卫生事件（PHEICs）期间，《国际卫生条例（IHR）》要求世界卫生组织（WHO）发布关于国际旅行和贸易措施使用的临时建议。在 COVID-19 大流行期间，世卫组织最初反对“任何旅行或贸易限制”的建议受到质疑，几乎所有国家随后都采取了国际旅行措施。世卫组织向缔约国提出的建议也在大流行期间发生了变化。有必要了解世卫组织在处理这一问题上与其他 PHEICs 的比较，以及缔约国的行动为何与世卫组织的初步建议存在分歧。这是首次对世卫组织在所有七次 PHEIC 期间关于国际旅行和贸易措施的临时建议进行分析，比较了在几个实质性和程序性领域指导的清晰度和一致性。我们发现，世卫组织指导意见缺乏清晰度和一致性，使得人们难以解释并与《国际卫生条例》义务联系起来。基于这一分析，我们提出了一些建议，以提高世卫组织在全球卫生紧急情况下就这一问题提供指导的一致性和清晰度。
