WHO and COVID-19: stress testing the boundary of science and politics

Abstract

Specialized agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO) emphasize the importance of impartiality and independence to ensure state compliance and buy-in to their institutional mandate. For functionalists, the boundary distinction between scientific expertise and politics is useful for interest-minded states and institutions that want to promote knowledge over politics. In extreme crisis states revert to national interests. The question for specialized agencies is whether to double-down on the boundary between science and politics during a crisis in an attempt to maintain authority. The COVID-19 pandemic tested this functional arrangement in international relations where scientific validity can facilitate the pursuit of global governance. This article explores why, in a time of crisis, WHO leadership maintained that the boundary between science and politics could be upheld, even when others identified politics as affecting impartiality and independence. It does so by exploring the role of governance processes and technical expertise led by the WHO in investigating the origins of COVID-19 pandemic. Doubling down on science as a solution ignored the politics that permeated, especially, the origins investigation in China. We argue that while the temptation to enforce boundary work may be more acute in periods of crisis, attempts to maintain boundaries between politics and science during a crisis undermines the function and reputation of specialized technical agencies. It is more functional to expose the political conditions as compromising scientific independence and impartiality.