2 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2019
    1. Policymakers in Guinea

      Given that the Case studies were broken down by country, I would have expected at least the first paragraph of this section to bind the Case studies together from a policy diffusion/ policy learning perspective (e.g. in terms of more or less strenuous conditions during outbreaks or 'peacetime'), before zooming back in to highlight certain aspects from the Case studies.

    2. In three of these countries (i.e. Guinea, Argentina and India), the CIOMS Guidelines have had direct influence over their domestic governance policies on the subject. Its impact was greatest for Guinea and Argentina, whose governance policies had to be adapted in response to the Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa and the Zika virus epidemic in Latin America. In both countries, sharing of biological materials and related data with international organisations increased significantly to meet therapeutic and research needs during the outbreaks. International organisations have had a comparatively greater role in bringing about policy change in Guinea when compared with Argentina, mainly due to the fragility of the health system in Guinea in 2014. In contrast, policy in India and in Malawi occurred under less strenuous conditions. This may account for the relatively greater emphasis on control and limits to cross-border transferability in their policies when compared with those of Guinea and Argentina.

      I would have expected the Background section to set the stage for the case studies, not to sum up their results.