ArticleGlobalization and health2026
Trade, power, and public health: a political economy analysis of Thailand's CPTPP negotiation process.
Article in Globalization and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) has generated intense debate in Thailand, concerning its implications for public health, particularly intellectual property, and access to medicines. During 2018-2022, Thailand undertook an extended in-country process to provide evidence on its economic opportunity and public health challenges for the Cabinet decision. However, there is no evidence indicating whether Thailand has decided to join the CPTPP. This study examines Thailand's CPTPP negotiation process using a political economy framework, focusing on the institutional and actor landscape that shaped the negotiations.
methodsThis study employed a qualitative research design grounded in political economy theory, integrating state-centred and power-centred analytical frameworks. Data collection comprised a document review and in-depth interviews with 31 stakeholders from the health and trade sectors, covering state officials, academics, the private sector, and civil society representatives.
resultsThe findings demonstrate critical public health concerns centred on pharmaceutical access, plant variety protection, and medical device regulatory standards. The findings also reveal a complex landscape of stakeholder dynamics and power asymmetries in Thailand's CPTPP negotiation process. Although both state and non-state actors played influential roles in shaping public discourse and decision-making, the decision-making was dominated by state trade actors, as the lead negotiating authority, marginalising health sector perspectives despite their active engagement. While civil society leveraged collaborative power to exert political pressure, structural imbalances and a lack of transparency persisted. In addition, intra-sectoral differences also existed and were influenced by institutional positioning.
conclusionThe study highlights the need for stronger institutional mechanisms to promote inclusive stakeholder participation and greater policy coherence between trade and public health objectives in future trade negotiations. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.