WHO Worth Fighting For: Authors Make the Case for Ambitious Reform
Anders Nordström, together with John Nkengasong, Peter Piot, Magda Robalo Correia e Silva, Ala Alwan, Ethel L Maciel, Ren Minghui, and Michel Kazatchkine, published today a Comment in The Lancet arguing that WHO urgently needs reform or risks declining into irrelevance.
The comment states that while calls for change are not new, the urgency and opportunity to act are unprecedented. With the 2026 World Health Assembly approaching and the election of WHO's next Director-General in 2027, the authors propose three core functions WHO must strengthen: (1) norm and standard setting in international health, (2) surveillance and cross-border threat management, and (3) convening. The authors offer six concrete structural reforms covering governance, financing, operational focus, workforce, and country-level relevance.
However, the authors also recognise barriers to reform, with the greatest one being political. “Do governments want a strong, authoritative WHO that is capable of telling them uncomfortable truths? Or do they prefer a sprawling, financially dependent agency that manages projects but avoids confrontation?” Ultimately, the responsibility of WHO reforms rests with the member states, through the demands they place on WHO and the resources they provide.
Failing to build a more fit-for-purpose WHO, they conclude, would be a geopolitical failure.