Chile’s role in global health diplomacy: a narrative literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Global health diplomacy (GHD) has become an important field of investigation due to health concerns increasingly entering the foreign policy domain. Much of the existing academic writing focuses on North-South cooperation in global health, and emphasizes the role of security and economic interests by Northern countries as drivers of GHD. Chile presents a favourable environment for an expanded involvement in future GHD activities. However, there is little knowledge about what has been driving Chile's integration of health into foreign policy, and little effort to appropriate knowledge from international relations theories to better theoretically grasp the emergence of GHD. METHODS: To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a narrative literature review of the driving forces behind Chile's integration of health into foreign policy. Drawing on a popular analytical framework used in international relations scholarship, we identified driving forces of the integration of health into Chile foreign policy at three levels of analysis. RESULTS: At the international/global level of analysis, the main driving forces were related to national security concerns and compliance with regulations of international organizations. At the regional level, GHD was driven by a commitment to regional solidarity through mutually beneficial cooperation in response to neoliberal reforms; health coordination in emergencies; and protection of indigenous peoples. Finally, at the domestic level, drivers identified include economic interests of various productive sectors and how health regulations might impact those; the high degree of social inequity which impacts on access to healthcare; and management of natural disasters. CONCLUSION: Health actions in the context of international relations in Chile are still mainly motivated by more traditional foreign policy interests rather than by a desire to satisfy health needs per se. This seems to conform with findings of existing GHD scholarship that emphasize the importance of security and economic interests as driving forces of GHD, and how health is often appropriated instrumentally within foreign policy settings to achieve other goals. But the review also reveals that in the context of South-South cooperation (and regional health diplomacy), solidarity and normative considerations can be important driving forces as well. Finally, the review demonstrates that there has been an evolution from chiefly domestically focused health policies (e.g. maternal and child nutrition treatment) towards internationally inspired integrated policies (e.g. maternal and child nutrition promotion aligned with international guidelines).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".