The US–Australia free trade agreement: The interface between partisan politics and national objectives
The literature on the drivers behind bilateral treaties implies an assumption that international treaties are entered into primarily to achieve national objectives, not partisan political goals. This paper investigates whether this assumption is valid, using as a case study the recently enacted US–Australia Free Trade Agreement. A stated original purpose for the agreement—increasing access to the US market for Australian agricultural products—would yield significant economic benefits for Australia. However, when it became clear that this goal would not be achieved, the objective of the Australian government shifted. The most plausible explanation for the shift is that domestic political objectives had moved to the fore and prompted the government to pursue and adopt the treaty despite some evidence that it might not be in the national interest to do so.
Bilateral trade agreements as drivers of national and transnational benefit from health technology policy: implications of recent US deals for Australian negotiations with China and India
This article compares controversial health technology provisions in two important United States free trade agreements with developed nations: Australia and with South Korea. It examines the multinational corporate forces behind the medicines and medical devices components of these texts and their likely impacts upon Australian trade negotiations with China and India. It also examines the implications of some recent changes to US trade policy for this area in subsequent bilateral deals such as that with Peru. This article argues it is important that the Australian government change policy and, like the present Congress in the United States, now systematically approach such impending trade agreements with a view to assisting the partners’ regulatory frameworks to maximally enhance national and transnational benefit from their medicines and biotechnology industries.
Public health in eight European countries: an international comparison of terminology.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this paper was to assess the use of different terms pertaining to public health in selected Member States of the European Union.


STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
Qualitative research methods were used to compare the terminology among eight Member States. Seven to nine core terms were defined for each country, and a search was performed for these terms in the names of institutions and professional titles, organized into three comparable categories.


RESULTS
The data analysis showed considerable diversity in terminology. The three most commonly used terms for each country, and the frequency distribution of the core terms for all eight countries were determined.


CONCLUSION
Public health terminology and underlying concepts vary among Member States of the European Union. A large number of loosely related terms are in use, indicating the lack of a common conceptual framework for the discipline of public health. The most commonly used terms pertaining to public health are 'health sciences' and 'health promotion'. 'Public health' is not among the most commonly used terms.