ArticleGlobalization and health2026
Security governance and health inequity in contemporary crises: a critical discourse analysis of securitization, exception-making, and responsibility displacement.
Article in Globalization and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contemporary crises increasingly draw health systems, humanitarian access, medical supply chains, and civilian protection into security-oriented governance. While the health consequences of war and economic coercion, and geopolitical rivalry are widely documented, less attention has been paid to the discursive processes through which such consequences are rendered legitimate, unavoidable, or politically peripheral. This paper addresses this gap by applying a critical geopolitics framework and critical discourse analysis to examine how geopolitical narratives may structure health-relevant governance during crises. Drawing on a purposive, illustrative corpus - (i) a primary corpus of institutional and policy discourse (state communications, United Nations and World Health Organization documents, sanctions guidance, and international non-governmental organizations' reports) and (ii) a secondary corpus of scholarly literature, the study identifies three recurring discursive mechanisms: securitization, exception-making, and displacement of responsibility. Across five illustrative case contexts-US-China geopolitical rivalry, the Russia-Ukraine war, the Israel-Palestine/Gaza crisis, Iran-related sanctions and protest governance, and US-Venezuela sanctions governance-the analysis suggests how security narratives can condition humanitarian access, reshape the practical meaning of civilian protection, and diffuse accountability for health harms. Rather than arguing that discourse alone causes health outcomes, the paper treats discourse as one governance condition among others: it influences what becomes politically thinkable and institutionally actionable while interacting with military, economic, legal, and health-system factors. The findings advance critical health geopolitics and peace and security scholarship by showing how health inequities can function as a diagnostic lens through which norm erosion and the normalization of exceptional governance become empirically visible.Clinical trial numberNot applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.