UPSC Essentials | Mains answer practice — GS 3 : Questions on economic effect of hosting Olympics and global pandemic treaty (Week 104)

QUESTION 1

The World Health Organisation’s approval of the global pandemic treaty is an important step towards worldwide health cooperation. Discuss the essential provisions of this treaty and critically evaluate the obstacles connected with its implementation.

QUESTION 2

India’s bid to host the 2036 Olympic Games is frequently defended in terms of economic development, tourism, and public health initiatives. Drawing on worldwide experience, critically assess the long-term socioeconomic and health consequences of hosting major athletic events.

General points on the structure of the answers

Introduction

— The introduction of the answer is essential and should be restricted to 3-5 lines. Remember, a one-liner is not a standard introduction.

— It may consist of basic information by giving some definitions from the trusted source and authentic facts.

Body

— It is the central part of the answer and one should understand the demand of the question to provide rich content.

— The answer must be preferably written as a mix of points and short paragraphs rather than using long paragraphs or just points.

— Using facts from authentic government sources makes your answer more comprehensive. Analysis is important based on the demand of the question, but do not over analyse.

QUESTION 1: The World Health Organisation’s approval of the global pandemic treaty is an important step towards worldwide health cooperation. Discuss the essential provisions of this treaty and critically evaluate the obstacles connected with its implementation.

Introduction:

— Following more than three years of rigorous talks, member nations of the World Health Organisation (WHO) agreed a legally binding convention to better address future pandemics.

— The pandemic treaty, which was adopted without the United States, is only the second legally binding agreement in the WHO’s 75-year existence, following the 2003 tobacco control treaty.

Body:

— Negotiations for a global pandemic treaty began in December 2021, just as the Omicron strain of SARS-CoV-2 was spreading over the world, causing a significant new surge in COVID-19.

— According to a Nature report, one of the agreement’s key components is a “pathogen access and benefit sharing” system, which allows pharmaceutical companies access to scientific data such as pathogen samples and genomic sequences in exchange for more equitable sharing of drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics during a pandemic.

— According to the treaty, member firms must give 10% of their vaccine, therapeutic, and diagnostic production to the WHO. Another 10% will be provided at “affordable prices”.

— The agreement also specifies that member states should “promote and otherwise facilitate or incentivise” the exchange of technology and know-how to assist developing-country manufacturers in producing their own pharmaceuticals and vaccines.

— Countries must also adopt national laws to impose constraints on medicine and vaccine research that they fund, either through universities or private enterprises, in order to ensure “timely and equitable access” to the ensuing drugs or diagnostics during pandemics.

Conclusion:

— Although the deal has been lauded as innovative and historic, numerous analysts have argued that its scope is limited. For example, the agreement does not grant the WHO authority over specific governments.

— The pact also states that the WHO does not have the authority to dictate or enforce any obligations, such as “ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates, therapeutic or diagnostic measures, or implement lockdown.”

— In an effort to avoid the loss of human life and disruption to households and communities as a whole – as occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic – during future pandemics, WHO member states banded together and began to work out an agreement. It took over three and a half years and thirteen rounds of negotiations to obtain an agreement.

(Source: Member states of WHO adopt global pandemic treaty: What does it entail?)

Points to Ponder

Read more about Pandemic treaty

Read about WHO

Related Previous Year Questions

Introduce the concept of Artificial Intelligence (AI). How does AI help clinical diagnosis? Do you perceive any threat to privacy of the individual in the use of AI in healthcare? (2023)

What is the basic principle behind vaccine development? How do vaccines work? What approaches were adopted by the Indian vaccine manufacturers to produce COVID-19 vaccines? (2022)

QUESTION 2: India’s bid to host the 2036 Olympic Games is frequently defended in terms of economic development, tourism, and public health initiatives. Drawing on worldwide experience, critically assess the long-term socioeconomic and health consequences of hosting major athletic events.

Introduction:

— India is one of many countries interested in hosting the 2036 Olympics, having sent a Letter of Intent to the International Olympic Committee.

— As the country builds a solid case for hosting the Olympics, officials participating in the process have highlighted the possible economic gains, tourism boost, and health awareness as some of the advantages of hosting the Games.

Body:

— A recent study published in Social Science & Medicine utilised data from over 19,000 London and Paris citizens to assess the Olympics’ concrete and intangible impact, with an emphasis on health behaviour, wellbeing, and economic return.

— The Paris Olympics were one enormous fortnight-long celebration on the Seine. The London Games were also a cultural highlight, with a joyful spirit sweeping the city. In post-Games surveys, 65 percent of Londoners characterised the summer of 2012 as “a summer like no other,” with 69 percent believing the Games would inspire more adults to participate in sports. Among children, this figure increased to an astounding 81%.

Economic effect of hosting Olympics

— The most contentious part of hosting the Olympics is the financial load it lays on taxpayers. Estimates for recent Games range from $8 billion (Sydney 2000) to $52 billion (Beijing 2008). The most recent Paris Olympics cost around $9.5 billion.

— There’s the case of Athens 2004, which ended up costing more than twice its intended budget, forcing Greece farther into debt. Many Olympic venues became idle “white elephants,” and while the Games provided brief pride, they also left behind deteriorating infrastructure and a financial burden that contributed to Greece’s subsequent economic disaster.

— The report also stated that “the London Games simply did not generate enough healthcare savings to justify the billions spent”. The health argument is that the Games can motivate people to live better lives, while increased infrastructure and connectivity have an indirect impact on a city’s healthcare facilities.

Conclusion:

— The analysis indicated that, while the London Olympics saved approximately £4.2 million in healthcare expenses, this was swamped by the £40 million spent on promoting grassroots physical activity. The outcome was a net loss of more than £35 million. In short, the Games did not provide good value for money in terms of public health outcomes.

(Source: As India bids for Olympics, what research has found about health, economic impacts on hosts)

Points to Ponder

Read about Olympics

What are the criteria to host the Olympics?

Related Previous Year Questions

What are the direct and indirect subsidies provided to farm sector in India? Discuss the issues raised by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in relation to agricultural subsidies. (2023)

Previous Mains Answer Practice

UPSC Essentials: Mains answer practice — GS 3 (Week 102)

UPSC Essentials: Mains answer practice — GS 3 (Week 103)

UPSC Essentials: Mains answer practice — GS 2 (Week 102)

UPSC Essentials: Mains answer practice — GS 2 (Week 103)

UPSC Essentials: Mains answer practice — GS 1 (Week 102)

UPSC Essentials: Mains answer practice — GS 1 (Week 101)

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.