Capacity building for global health diplomacy: Thailand's experience of trade and health.

A rapid expansion of trade liberalization in Thailand during the 1990s raised a critical question for policy transparency from various stakeholders. Particular attention was paid to a bilateral trade negotiation between Thailand and USA concerned with the impact of the 'Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Rights (TRIPS) plus' provisions on access to medicines. Other trade liberalization effects on health were also concerning health actors. In response, a number of interagency committees were established to engage with trade negotiations. In this respect, Thailand is often cited as a positive example of a country that has proactively sought, and achieved, trade and health policy coherence. This article investigates this relationship in more depth and suggests lessons for wider study and application of global health diplomacy (GHD). This study involved semi-structured interviews with 20 people involved in trade-related health negotiations, together with observation of 9 meetings concerning trade-related health issues. Capacity to engage with trade negotiations appears to have been developed by health actors through several stages; starting from the Individual (I) understanding of trade effects on health, through Nodes (N) that establish the mechanisms to enhance health interests, Networks (N) to advocate for health within these negotiations, and an Enabling environment (E) to retain health officials and further strengthen their capacities to deal with trade-related health issues. This INNE model seems to have worked well in Thailand. However, other contextual factors are also significant. This article suggests that, in building capacity in GHD, it is essential to educate both health and non-health actors on global health issues and to use a combination of formal and informal mechanisms to participate in GHD. And in developing sustainable capacity in GHD, it requires long term commitment and strong leadership from both health and non-health sectors

Sustainability Consciousness Dimensions for Achieving Sustainability Performance in Thailand: Role of Supply Chain Resilience

Organization can never achieve sustainability until its employees not develop such consciousness about sustainability. Such consciousness includes knowingness, attitude and behavior regarding sustainability which can affect sustainability performance. This research has seen the impact of supply chain resilience on sustainability performance in mediating role of sustainability consciousness in Thailand’s manufacturing sector. Managerial employees have been taken as unit of analysis as data has been collected from them through questionnaire. Respective data was then analyzed by applying CFA and SEM through AMOS and data screening through SPSS. Results have confirmed that supply chain resilience has significant impact on sustainability performance through sustainability consciousness dimensions. This study is unique and novel due to adding sustainability performance as new outcome of resilience driven sustainability consciousness. Implications of this study will add empirical evidence about sustainability consciousness and performance linkage and will also facilitate Thailand’s manufacturing industry to train their employees to develop sustainability consciousness in them. Future research indications and limitations have also been given in this study

Evidence-informed capacity building for setting health priorities in low- and middle-income countries: : A framework and recommendations for further research

Priority-setting in health is risky and challenging, particularly in resource-constrained settings. It is not simply a narrow technical exercise, and involves the mobilisation of a wide range of capacities among stakeholders – not only the technical capacity to “do” research in economic evaluations. Using the Individuals, Nodes, Networks and Environment (INNE) framework, we identify those stakeholders, whose capacity needs will vary along the evidence-to-policy continuum. Policymakers and healthcare managers require the capacity to commission and use relevant evidence (including evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness, and of social values); academics need to understand and respond to decision-makers’ needs to produce relevant research. The health system at all levels will need institutional capacity building to incentivise routine generation and use of evidence. Knowledge brokers, including priority-setting agencies (such as England’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Health Interventions and Technology Assessment Program, Thailand) and the media can play an important role in facilitating engagement and knowledge transfer between the various actors. Especially at the outset but at every step, it is critical that patients and the public understand that trade-offs are inherent in priority-setting, and careful efforts should be made to engage them, and to hear their views throughout the process. There is thus no single approach to capacity building; rather a spectrum of activities that recognises the roles and skills of all stakeholders. A range of methods, including formal and informal training, networking and engagement, and support through collaboration on projects, should be flexibly employed (and tailored to specific needs of each country) to support institutionalisation of evidence-informed priority-setting. Finally, capacity building should be a two-way process; those who build capacity should also attend to their own capacity development in order to sustain and improve impact

IMPULSIVE INEQUALITIES FOR MULTI-DELAY JUMP CONDITIONS

Abstract. In this paper, we establish some new impulsive inequalities for multi-delay jump conditions in which the jump conditions depend on multi-point of the states at past times. These inequalities can be used as basic tools in the study of differential equations with nonlocal impulse effects. Some examples are given to illustrate the application of our results