Humanities, criticality and transparency: global health histories and the foundations of inter-sectoral partnerships for the democratisation of knowledge

Historians of medicine have increasingly demonstrated the value of historical research in informing contemporary healthcare policy. Questions surrounding health, disease, and the acceptance of solutions are deeply embedded in complex cultural and historical contexts. Historians critically examine these contexts, providing valuable insights for policymakers. This article examines the WHO's GHH project, established in 2004, which uses historical understanding to address present-day global health challenges. The project facilitates conversations between researchers and policymakers to bridge the gap between historical evidence and current policy approaches. The article explores the challenges of integrating history into policy, including maintaining scholarly independence and criticality, effectively communicating the value of historical methodology, and navigating complex institutional dynamics. It also addresses concerns about potential misappropriation of historical research to support specific policy agendas and the need for a more systematic approach to integrating history into the policy process. Ultimately, the article questions the extent to which academic historians can influence global health work and how they can ensure diverse voices are represented in policy discussions.

The introduction cites several authors who support the integration of historical research into health policymaking. Birn (2009) highlights the importance of extracting 'real lessons' from the past. Stevens et al. (2006) and Pickersgill et al. (2018) emphasize the impossibility of understanding health policy without historical and social science insights. Berridge (2008) and Sheard (2018) warn against the misuse of history by policymakers without the involvement of professional historians. The report 'What is the Value of History in Policymaking?' (Haddon et al., 2015) underscores the need for a more systematic approach to embedding history within the policy process. Finally, Hazelkorn (2015) and King and Rivett (2015) discuss the increasing pressure on academics in arts and humanities to demonstrate the impact of their research, particularly when it falls outside mainstream definitions of impact.

The article uses a case study approach, focusing on the WHO GHH project. Data collection involved interviews with 22 individuals connected to the project, both within and outside the WHO. Thirteen individuals provided responses, some choosing to remain anonymous, others agreeing to be named. These interviews supplement published reflections and aim to understand the project's development, challenges, and achievements. The article draws upon the authors' own experiences with the project, as well as project documents, reports, and publications such as Wellcome History. This qualitative methodology examines the project's evolution from its inception, tracing changes in its structure, scope, and impact over approximately 15 years. The analysis includes descriptions of the project's internal workings, collaborations with other organizations, methods of public engagement, and strategies for demonstrating impact. The study critically examines the opportunities and challenges involved in bridging the gap between academic historical research and international health policy and explores the successes and limitations of the project in achieving its objectives of promoting transparency, inclusivity, and collaboration.

The GHH project, initially focused on providing historical insights to WHO staff, evolved into a broader initiative engaging various stakeholders, including policymakers, healthcare professionals, journalists, and the general public. Key aspects of the project's development include: * **Expansion of Scope:** The project's thematic focus broadened beyond the WHO's internal history to encompass a wider range of global health issues. * **Increased Internationalization:** The seminars expanded beyond Geneva to include WHO regional and country offices, leading to a more global reach and engagement with diverse perspectives. * **Interdisciplinary Collaboration:** The project increasingly involved scholars from various disciplines, fostering a more comprehensive understanding of health issues. * **Public Engagement:** The project utilized various methods, such as live-streaming, publications, and exhibitions, to reach a wider audience. * **Challenges:** The project faced challenges in maintaining funding, navigating bureaucratic processes, securing consistent involvement from WHO staff, effectively measuring impact, balancing criticality with collaboration, and adapting to rapid changes within the WHO's organizational structure. * **Successes:** The project successfully built bridges between different departments within the WHO, fostered a collaborative environment among stakeholders, provided an accessible platform for knowledge exchange, raised public awareness about important global health issues, and offered a platform for critical engagement with the WHO's policies and practices. The project also produced multi-lingual, accessible books based on seminar themes, extending its reach and impact. The creation of a WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Health Histories at the University of York strengthened the initiative's institutional backing and facilitated its long-term sustainability.

The GHH project demonstrates the potential of historical research to inform and shape global health policy. The project's success in fostering dialogue, collaboration, and public engagement highlights the value of integrating humanities perspectives into international health initiatives. However, the challenges faced by the project also underscore the need for careful planning, sustained funding, flexible strategies, and a clear understanding of institutional dynamics. The project’s capacity to create opportunities for interdisciplinary research and collaboration within and beyond the WHO, while maintaining transparency and critical engagement, contributes to a more democratized approach to knowledge production and policy-making in global health. The long-term sustainability of similar endeavors depends on navigating the complexities of institutional collaborations, resource constraints, and differing timeframes and priorities of academic and policy contexts. By engaging in diverse perspectives, celebrating inclusivity, and openly addressing limitations, these projects contribute to the broader goal of creating ‘healthy publics’.

The WHO GHH project serves as a valuable model for integrating historical research into global health policy. Its success demonstrates the potential of collaborative, interdisciplinary approaches to address complex health challenges. However, the challenges faced highlight the need for careful planning, sustained resources, and adaptability to institutional contexts. Future research should focus on developing more robust methods for measuring the impact of such initiatives and exploring innovative ways to bridge the gap between historical research and policy implementation. The emphasis on transparency, inclusivity and engagement in diverse perspectives continues to underpin future aims and directions of the project.

The study's reliance on interviews and project documents may limit the generalizability of findings to other similar initiatives. The focus on one specific project may not fully capture the range of experiences in integrating history into health policy. The subjective nature of the interviewees' recollections could introduce bias into the analysis. While efforts were made to capture a range of perspectives, the voices of certain stakeholders may remain underrepresented.