The World Health Summit, which takes place in Berlin in October, aims to improve health care in individual countries worldwide. It is oriented towards the agenda formulated in the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals. But is health a global problem? Aren’t deficits such as lack of medical care or polluted water rather a matter for nation states? Diplomatisches Magazin talked about this with the Program Director of the World Health Summit, Julian Kickbusch.
DM: Mr Kickbusch, many deficits in health care in individual countries are related to the infrastructure in nation states. Is a World Health Summit the right forum to address urgent health problems?
Julian Kickbusch: A central element of the World Health Summit is that we are an independent forum at the international level, bringing together academics and scientists with policymakers at the UN level. We also engage key civil society organizations and the private sector. Bringing together all four sectors, which are sometimes afraid of each other, both in our main program and in many different side meetings within the framework program, is an important goal of the World Health Summit.
DM: “G7 and G20 actions to improve global health” are also to be discussed. What is meant by this?
Julian Kickbusch: In the program of the World Health Summit 2023, for example, we are taking up the central meetings of the United Nations. For example, the UN High Level Meeting on the important topic of pandemic prevention and response, or the meeting on universal health coverage, which deals with the question of how to create equitable access to health care worldwide.
We also work closely with representatives of the G7/G20 nations; last year, for example, around 30 ministers from around the world were at the World Health Summit.
In this context, it is important to note that it was not until 2007, at the G7 meeting in Heiligendamm – at that time still the G8 – that the topic of global health was put on the agenda for the first time. This was at the initiative of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The international academic network of the World Health Summit, the M8 Alliance of Academic Health Centers, Universities and National Academies, was founded at that time on the model of the political G8, supported by the German Chancellor and her French counterpart at the time, Nicolas Sarkozy. Through this network, we can also bring the issues to the G7 and G20 at the national level.
Since its founding, the World Health Summit has been under the patronage of Germany and France, later joined by the European Commission and the World Health Organization (WHO).
DM: What is the M8 Alliance?
Julian Kickbusch: The M8 Alliance is our scientific foundation and was established in 2009 on the occasion of the first World Health Summit under the leadership of Charité with the aim of improving health worldwide. It is an international alliance of excellent universities and research institutions as well as of the national scientific academies of medicine and now has 28 members in 20 countries.
At the time of the first World Health Summit, the topic of global health was not yet known to the general public in the same way as today; it tended to be viewed through a medical lens. This has now changed, not least due to the World Health Summit and the M8 Alliance. After all, global health involves far more than just medical issues; it is an interdisciplinary topic. Social factors are also important - education, for example, is a major issue, as is climate change and many other cross-sectoral issues.
DM: The World Health Summit is also supposed to be about digitalization in relation to global health. What do you mean by that?
Julian Kickbusch: Digitization is a key issue for global healthcare, with enormous opportunities and, of course, risks. Digital health always raises the question of how to deal with big data. Data protection is viewed differently in different countries. This is something that needs to be discussed. Where is data useful for effective health strategies, and where is it important to protect the privacy of the individual. Another key issue is how to deal with the big private tech companies like Google and YouTube that are increasingly playing a role in health. There is a lot of need for discussion.
DM: Also on the agenda of the World Health Summit: lessons from the Covid pandemic for future pandemics. What lessons are those?
Julian Kickbusch: Many partners have learned very different lessons. But one thing has become very clear. What didn't work at all is that many organizations and governments that presented themselves as global thinkers and doers before the pandemic turned their focus back to their own national interests. While there have been programs like Covax, the initiative for equitable global access to COVID-19 vaccines, we have also seen that the issue of patent rights and how to deal with them is not insignificant. After all, the private sector's main argument is that it has invested a lot of money in development. And that, of course, is an argument against the free distribution of vaccines and drugs, unless there is compensation. This is a point that shows that we are still not working together properly globally. That has to change if we want to be well prepared for future pandemics.
DM: Which countries are represented at the World Health Summit?
Julian Kickbusch: At the last World Health Summit in 2022, speakers and participants from over 140 nations were represented - on site and online. We make sure that as many participants and speakers as possible come from the global South, we want to talk to each other and not about each other. And for those who cannot travel to the event, we will again make it possible for them to participate in the entire program live online and free of charge. All of the nearly 60 sessions will be available on our YouTube channel. We also explicitly invite ambassadors from all over the world.
DM: How is the World Health Summit financed?
Julian Kickbusch: We rely on mixed financing, from different areas. A central element for us is the independence of content, that no one from the outside can determine our program, not directly and not indirectly. That's why we work with a 33% model: one third of the money comes from the national level, such as the Berlin Senate and the German government, one third from foundations like the Gates Foundation or the Wellcome Trust, and the rest from the private sector, such as pharmaceutical companies and tech companies like Google and YouTube.
Interview Marie Wildermann