The Bergen Declaration 2018: Did it drive the Migration Health Agenda forward in Norway?

 

The growing body of migrant health research at all levels focuses around disease burden, risk factors/behaviours and on distal factors but research on policy issues remains limited. Internationally published declarations and recommendations to take the migrant health agenda forward address policy issues. However declarations at country are few and not systematically followed up.

The Bergen Declaration was endorsed at Norway's' First National Conference on Migration Health (2018) by the multi-disciplinary participants. The declaration reflects the ‘upstream' and ‘downstream' areas addressed and discussed at the conference and includes concrete recommendations for key areas. It was widely disseminated, including high-level policy makers. Prior to the second Migration Health Conference (2020), the progress of the recommendations were reviewed. Since 2018, Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) in Norway from 2015 was updated in 2019 and a Country Assessment as part of the WP7 of Joint Action on Health Equity Europe (JAHEE) was conducted providing the basis to review the recommendations of the Bergen Declaration. In addition, the 2020 Committee conducted a desk review and search to follow up the recommendations. The review revealed that among identified ‘upstream' areas most progress had been made with data collection and research and the least in policy and governance. Among the ‘downstream' areas some progress was observed regarding practise and access to health services. Education and Training had received some attention. The Bergen Declaration reflects the consensus regarding migrant health and recommendations to address these issues in Norway. Monitoring the progress made through data that included policy review revealed progress and gaps. Progress in research, education and practise was evident whereas policy change was not. Policy makers have not paid heed to the Bergen Declaration.

Key messages

The Bergen Declaration was a useful tool for initiating and monitoring progress in research, education and practice. Declarations do not support advancement of policies and other means are required to push the policies forward.

Terror warfare and the medicine of peace

Terror warfare's goal is to defeat political opposition by controlling populations through the fear of brutality. Mozambique's 1976-92 war stands as a prime example of this military strategy: over one million people, the vast majority of whom were civilians, were killed. Half of these casualties were children. Fully one-half of the population was directly affected by the war, and one-quarter had to flee their homes. As devastating as terror warfare is, it is destined to fail. People ultimately resist, and they do so in complex and creative ways. Rebuilding war-destroyed worlds, healing the wounds of violence, and crafting concepts of self-identity based on resistance to aggression become powerful conflict-resolution strategies among the average citizenry. The creative resources that Mozambicans developed to survive and end a very brutal war are among the most sophisticated I have seen anywhere in the world. Their war was against violence itself.

A question of medicine answering. Health commodification and the social relations of healing in Sri Lanka

Biomedicine although institutionally powerful in Sri Lanka has not been able to depersonalize illness or promote a notion of treatment efficacy disconnected from social relations. An ideology of healing crosscuts the trend toward health commodification. This paper focuses on three concepts fundamental to the interactive dynamics of treatment efficacy: constitution, habit, and power of the hand. A movement between two distinct types of health care seeking behavior is described. One is inspired by finding the right medicine fix, the other by finding a practitioner having a sensitivity toward one's sense of person and all this entails.