Howard Zucker on the World Health Organization and health policy
Howard Zucker is the former Assistant Director-General of the World Health Organization in charge of the Health Technology & Pharmaceuticals cluster, and Representative of the Director-General on Intellectual Property, Innovation, and Public Health. Zucker previously worked in Washington as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Health. He is currently leading a study group at Harvard’s Institute of Politics entitled “Improving U.S. Foreign Policy through Global Health Diplomacy,” and recently sat down with the HPR for an interview.
Harvard Political Review: How and why did you get involved in the World Health Organization?
Howard Zucker: I was involved with many projects that dealt with the WHO when I was in Washington, but I had a chance meeting with the Director-General at a conference in South America. It resulted in a conversation that brought me to the WHO shortly thereafter. The WHO was important to me because of its ability to work on problems which are global in scope and critical to any effort in solving public health crises. I believe that if we as a nation are going to make strides forward in helping other countries, then we have to take our collective talent in the areas of science, engineering, public health, law, diplomacy, and apply them for the greater good.
HPR: How does politics intersect with the global health world? How do public health officials influence public diplomacy through global health?
HZ: I think that, initially, the political world looks at things through a different lens than the scientific world. People who look at problems from the world of politics know that the decisions they make may have long-term consequences. So when scientists and public health experts approach those who are in the world of politics, it’s important to explain to them how the initiatives are going to benefit society, and how they will provide political goodwill for our nation. Every decision that’s made has a political component. However, the best scenario is when the political agenda dovetails with public health, engineering or even the arts.
HPR: In the context of global health, you’ve written that developing nations no longer want only to be on the receiving end of money. Why do you believe this to be true?
HZ: Years ago, if a prosperous country offered generous support for programs that would help solve a problem in a developing nation, the developing nations were quick to receive that aid. To some degree, that’s still the case, but my experience at WHO has shown me that the leadership of the developing world is no longer content with just getting a check. They want to be part of the decision-making process. I’ve noticed this on all of the issues at the WHO: from the intellectual property issues and trade negotiations, to avian influenza, to malaria, to research and the successes of research and development, and fighting counterfeit medicines. I think that’s fantastic.
HPR: What international role do you see the WHO playing in 20 or 30 years?
HZ: I think that organizations like the WHO have a significant role to play on the global stage, and particularly in the area of global health. The WHO is the most visible organization that we turn to for solutions to global health problems. I see two important challenges for the WHO. First, it’s incredibly important for the WHO to transition into an organization which recognizes that partnerships with companies are as important as partnerships with NGOs. The culture within the organization, depending on who you talk to, can be very anti-industry. It’s important that as we move forward, we take the talent from all sectors of society. Another challenge for the WHO will be to recognize the pace at which society and [global health] issues are moving. When the WHO was established, there were not as many NGOs and individuals involved [with] and dedicated to improving global health. If there was a problem, you turned to the WHO. Today the WHO needs to make sure that they maintain their role as the pace-setter in the world on these issues. I believe that if you don’t have the cash, you better have the cachet. The WHO has the cachet to be able to do things, and that’s critically important to solving global health problems.
Photo Credit: Harvard Institute of Politics