Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
There have been concerns about the recent private turn and re-emergence of philanthropies in world health, with many worrying about philanthropies' perceived lack of transparency and accountability. In contrast, I argue that while the private turn might have led to a decline in democratic or public accountability, it did not bring an end to all forms of accountability. Specifically, I suggest that philanthropists' involvement in global health has led to the spread of another, new form of accountability: epidemiological accountability. The latter is a combination of two regimes of expertise and practices hitherto kept separate: audit and epidemiology. To substantiate this argument, I draw on my research on the Bloomberg Initiative - a global effort to reduce tobacco use spearheaded by the Bloomberg and Gates foundations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David Reubi (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: