Cited by 85Public health and occupational medicineGlobal Security and Public HealthLegal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 Challenges

International cooperation during the COVID-19 pandemic

Open access
Brown, Gordon, Susskind, Daniel·2020·Oxford Review of Economic Policy

Abstract

This paper explores the concept of ‘global public goods’ (GPGs) in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. It argues that many of the tasks involved in public health, and in particular those involved in the control of an infectious disease like COVID-19, ought to be treated as GPGs that can only be effectively delivered through international cooperation. It sets out what a cooperative response to the COVID-19 pandemic should look like and introduces ideas for further discussion about how it might be financed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxrep/graa025

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The outcome of a weakest-link game depends on the weakest links among national governments.

    “Such a strategic situation is known as a weakest-link game, because the outcome—in this case the chance of a suppression solution—depends on the weakest links among the national governments.35, 36, 37”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. 8 There is partial recognition of this in the G20 Leaders' Statement on 27 March 2020, which included a commitment 'to further strengthen the WHO's mandate in coordinating the international fight against the pandemic'. See, for instance, Bollyky and Fidler (2020) for what such a review might look like. 9 https://home.cern/about/who-we-are/our-people References
  2. Bollyky, T., and Fidler, D. (2020), 'It's Time for an Independent Coronavirus Review', Foreign Affairs, April.
  3. Brilliant, L. (1985), The Management of Smallpox Eradication in India: A Case Study and Analysis, Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, G., & Susskind, D.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Susskind, Daniel
Venue
Oxford Review of Economic Policy
Published
2020
Volume
36
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
S64-S76
ISSN
  • 0266-903X (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2121
OpenAlex
W3038115417
Cited by
85
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 4
FWCI
59.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Oxford Review of Economic Policy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public health and occupational medicine
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Global Security and Public Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Legal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 Challenges
Keywords
global public goods, COVID-19 pandemic, international cooperation, infectious disease control, global health financing, international health governance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review