Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Mapping global policy discourse on antimicrobial resistance
  1. Didier Wernli1,
  2. Peter S Jørgensen2,3,
  3. Chantal M Morel4,5,
  4. Scott Carroll6,7,
  5. Stephan Harbarth4,8,
  6. Nicolas Levrat1,9,
  7. Didier Pittet4,8
  1. 1 Global Studies Institute,University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  2. 2 Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere,Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden
  3. 3 Stockholm Resilience Centre,Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
  4. 4 Infection Control Programme,University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland
  5. 5 London School of Economics, London, UK
  6. 6 Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of California, Davis, USA
  7. 7 Institute for Contemporary Evolution, Davis, USA
  8. 8 WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety,University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland
  9. 9 Faculty of Law,University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Didier Wernli; didier.wernli{at}


The rising importance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to the global health agenda is associated with a growing number of parties voicing their concern about the issue. With more recommendations and policies appearing, understanding the policy process requires making sense of the views, values, interests and goals of each participant. Policy frame analysis provides a method to understand both the scientific view and the actions advocated by global health actors to tackle AMR. Here we review and refine policy frame analyses of AMR using a deductive approach. Among several policy frames previously defined in the field of global health, we identify ‘AMR as healthcare’, ‘AMR as development’, ‘AMR as innovation’ and ‘AMR as security’ as frequent frames used in dealing with AMR. In addition, we found that ‘AMR as One Health’ constitutes a recent framing of the topic that seeks to provide an integrated understanding between human and animal health. Each frame originates in distinct scientific fields, conceptualises the main causes of AMR and prioritises different interventions and measurements. Better understanding and integration of these frames into an overarching social and ecological framework will support policy progress in tackling AMR.

  • health policies and all other topics
  • infections
  • diseases
  • disorders
  • injuries

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See:

View Full Text

Statistics from


  • Contributors DW designed the study, analysed the data and drafted the paper; PSJ, CMM, SC, SH, NL and DP provided text and edited the manuscript. DW produced the tables.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement No additional data are available.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.