The legitimization of WHO as a global policy-setter: A case-study of Denmark amidst the COVID-19 pandemic
Research Question
While global governance under the guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) has laid the groundwork for dealing with the crisis, at the national level, each country responded to the COVID-19 crisis according to its own self-regulatory patterns. In spite of structural gaps in resource distribution and health care facilities, the COVID-19 scenario showcases national governments’ role in shaping domestic health security policies. Thus, the importance of this study lies in the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the significance of national decision-making, and whether such decision-making is inspired by the WHO’s issued obligations and recommendations. The question that becomes relevant hereof is why Denmark is following the recommendations issued by the WHO regardless them being non-binding, hence there being no consequence of sanctions through either soft or hard power. Thus, the research question is:
To what extend is Denmark legitimizing WHO as a significant international policy-setter in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic by following its issued recommendations, hence they are non-binding?
Basically, the goal of the thesis is to showcase whether Denmark is legitimizing the WHO or not amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, and if yes, to what extend they do? This would be done by seeing if they follow the recommendations of the organization, and if this is a sign of them legitimizing/de-legitimizing the WHO.
